Argument Analysis: Animal Liberation Peter Singer’s “Animal Liberation” gave me a whole new perspective on animals and the way humans have been treating them. It is a convincing piece because it provides information that you would not have known about animals and the way they are being treated. I did not think about the animals and how their life was like before they were prepared as food for the people. Singer argues that since animals cannot speak for themselves we the people decide to speak for them but we do not know exactly what they want. It is true that we do things to animals that we are not for certain how are they are affected by it.
In some cases, animals are kept captive and are forced to do things they probably wouldn’t approve of if they had the choice. These animals should either be taken care of better, or put into their natural habitats to live their lives the way that they were meant to. They didn’t ask to be taken from their families and to go to places they don’t know. Put yourself in their situation, wouldn’t it be scary to be taken from your home to be forced into doing abnormal things that could potentially harm you? Although we don’t know what goes on in their minds, or what their emotions are, you can only imagine what their thinking.
They were accomplishing this, but through their limited knowledge of dinosaurs and their adaptive traits, the dinosaurs were able to adapt and reproduce despite being all female. InGen was then unable to control the population, which led to the park in an out of control downward spiral. Furthermore, InGen assumed that the dinosaurs would be like zoo animals and act passive and docile. The assumption that large, vicious animals like the Velociraptors and T-Rex would act like zoo animals is a ridiculous assumption. The animals we have in zoos now have been, for the most part,
Founding members of Showing Animals Respect and Kindness (SHARK) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) are groups of people that do not understand the origin of rodeo and its sensitivity to animal welfare issues. When something is not understood, it is commonly misconstrued. Rodeo is being protested against because the people of PETA and SHARK play on readers emotions. Emotions, especially “blind” ones, are strong enough to cause people to take action against organizations or activities about which they have no background information. If more people did not rely so much on emotions and relied more on intelligence, then problems like this would not arise.
Some animals such as tiger and rare species of birds are forced to live their lives in small cages. These tigers are not able to hunt as they would if they were in the wild; this also goes for the birds who are made to live in small cages and unable to spread their wings and fly so that they can hunt. Some zoos claim that they are using these animals to help educate the public and they might be doing so but it is coming at a high price. These animals do not deserve to live in these conditions just because zoos want to educate
We can not depend on the results of animal testing. Because animals and humans are different, the results of the animal tests might not apply to us. Just because one species reacts to a given drug or chemical in a particular way doesn't necessarily mean another species will respond the same way. Furthermore, animals kept in unnatural conditions, or animals in pain or distress, are not going to give consistent or accurate results anyway. One scholar mentions, “It is a flawed practice that has resulted in the needless suffering and deaths of millions of animals" (Festing 1).
You can state that it is an opinion matter but there are such factsthat prove either way. “Zoos are an unsuitable environment for wild animals and should,therefore, be abolished. Firstly, zoo animals are kept in a very confined areacompared with their vast natural habitat. Secondly, breeding programmes are farless successful than zoos claim. Thirdly, zoo animals are exposed to manydiseases and other dangers.” ("Zoos Should be Banned.”) “No matterhow big some zoos try to make the enclosures, no matter how many branches theyput in them, no matter how beautiful they make the background paintings on thewall, they don't compare with the natural habitat the animals were meant to bein.
Retrieved October 30, 2011 Supporting Material: 1. Document: Individuals possessing exotic animals often attempt to change the nature of the animal rather than the nature of the care provided. Such tactics include confinement in small barren enclosures, chaining, beating “into submission,” or even painful mutilations, such as declawing and tooth removal. (Travers, W) 2. Document: In some cases there are problems for survival of a species in the wild, there have been instances where hobbyists have saved species when their habitats were destroyed.
In fact, there are more places where they can be seen in the wild than places where they can be seen in captivity. In addition, places where there are wild marine mammals do not charge high entry fees. For example, many people now view dolphins from the cliffs and beaches of southern Cyprus, and along the coast of western Australia, swimming with friendly dolphins is becoming increasingly popular. The second important reason why marine parks should be closed is that scientific research conducted in parks is useful only for understanding captive animals and is not suitable for learning about animals in the wild. The biology of dolphins and whales changes in marine park conditions.
Such gardens were prototype of modern zoos. Until now,recreation is still the main use of zoo. Trainers demand animals to perform while most visitors spend more time on seeking entertainment rather than real knowledge about the animal. This kind of exploitation of animals for human entertainment is cruel and efforts should be made to stop it. Another strange phenomenon is that a lot of zoos also have used their animals on researches.