A Change Of Heart About Animals

Jeremy Rifkin is a very talented writer. In his article, “A Change of Heart about Animals,” Rifkin states the many different examples and studies that prove his argument, which states, “…many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined.” Rifkin is completely correct in this and does a wonderful job of proving his point. Animals are a lot more like us than imagined.

In the article “A Change of Heart about Animals” Jeremy Rifkin uses scientific evidence to reason with us that “many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined”. Rifkin suggests that animals should be treated better and be provided with better living conditions. He uses Betty and Koko as examples that animals have higher intellectual abilities and emotions than we thought. Many scientists also argued that animals do not have an understanding of death or capable of grief, but Rifkin counteracts that argument by using elephants as evidence to show that they are capable of grief.

My own personal response to the article “ A Change Of Heart About Animals” written by Jeremy Rifkin is he discusses information regarding animals and also birds. Also this article talks about researches about animal’s behavior. For example, studies show that pigs need affection and if neglected it may cause sadness for them and can cause failure in health. First, studies learned that crows have somewhat intelligence in themselves as well. For instance crows have a very well mindset on using tools.

“What these researchers are finding is that many our creatures are more like us than we ever imagined. They feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love -- and these findings are changing how we view animals,” said by Rifkin. In Rifkin’s article, A Change of Heart about Animals, highlights the fact we should have empathy of the way we treat our creatures that we share the earth with. He supports his argument with examples of animals having adroitness such as human do. Rifkin also addressesthe brain anatomy and chemisty similar to us.

In the article titled “A Change of Heart about Animals”, by Jeremy Rifkin, it talks about how us humans need to have a different perspective on how animals are treated and have more empathy for them. I however, disagree with Rifkin. It is essential to recognize that in nature, animals kill each other for food and have no sympathy for whatever it is that they are eating.With this said, why should killing,eating,and animal experimentation be any different or inhumane?

In the article, “A Change of Heart about Animals”, by Jeremy Rifkin argues about how scientists have shown and proven that there are many similarities between animals and humans. Jeremy Rifkin believes animals should be treated with more empathy and that the animals should be treated more like humans. I agree with this statement and that they should be treated better with more animal rights.

In Change of Heart about Animals, Jeremy Rifkin says “we should empathize with animals”. I completely disagree with his statement. I am a pet owner and although I love my pet I don't think I would view him on the same level as me. If I were to see him on the same level as me it would defeat the purpose of having a pet. I mean you don’t keep other humans as pets.

I honestly think that Jeremy Rifkin had some very significant findings when he published “A Change of Heart about Animals”. If it wasn't for Rifkin many people like myself would have not known that animals share some of the same traits as humans like grief, self awareness, and the need for affection. Everyone needs to know that animals aren't some type of toy but rather a living creature with feelings. Rifkin wants his readers to believe that humans and animals are much alike and want some of the same rights for them but is that a good idea…

In today’s society animals still do not have all the rights that they deserve. We still perform medical experiments, hunt them for “fun” and food, and keep them locked up in cages for “entertainment” at zoos. If animals had rights humans would not be using them for selfish purposes for fun and entertainment. In the article by Jeremy Rifkin it is mentioned that “researchers are finding that many of our fellow creatures are more like us than we had ever imagined. They feel

Cesar Chavez says “We need, in a special way, to work twice as hard to help people understand that animals are fellow creatures, that we must protect them and love them as we love ourselves,” - Cesar Chavez. This is a discussion about animal rights. People believe that animals should not have right for the fact there animals. From my point of view animals do need a Bill of Rights so we can treat them the way we want to be treated. Animals feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love.

Animals have similar characteristics to humans in terms of their physical and psychological states, thus we have a moral obligation to free them from unnecessary pain. More ethical alternatives to animal testing are more cost-effective, quicker and more reliable.

For many years there has been an ongoing debate on whether or not animals should be given rights, even there own bill of rights. Some who are against the animal bill of rights argue that testing products on animals is important to the safety of humans. Others who want the new bill of rights claim that animals have feelings and that science is treating them inhumanely. Animal activists also add that animals are intelligent beings and are aware of how they are treated. Based on science proving animal activists correct on many of their points, this calls for a new bill of rights, in the United States, especially written for the protection and care of wild and domestic animals.

Jeremy Rifkin in the article " A Change of Heart about Animals" argues on the fact that as incredible as it sounds, many of our fellow creatures as like us in so many ways. For example, in a movie named Paulie a young girl that suffers autism gets attached to a parrot. The girl struggles to talk but she just can't. Time passes by and then the girl starts talking because the parrot helped her. An incident happened so the little girl's parents decide to let the parrot go. The parrot ends up in an animal testing lab but somehow he managed to escape. The parrot begins to miss his owner because he formed a bond with a human being. Obviously, this proves Rifkin is right when he states that animals experience feelings like human beings.

In the article “A Change of Heart About Animals”, Rifkin asserts that humans are treating animals in the most atrocious way, and he claims that in order for their lives to improve, we need to definitely adjust ours. He uses great amount of logos, and several experiments done with different animals and tries his best to closely relate animals to us, humans. Rifkin although, never inserts a call for action to this problem throughout his article. Instead, he puts the emphasis on the pathos of the argument. In the world we are living in today, there is about 8.7 million different living species. Whether they are land or marine animals, they do play a big role in our community such as being apart of the food pyramid, assisting handicapped people wherever they go, or being a transportation for people living on farms and fields. With this being said, the ranking of animals in our community has brought up a heated argument in connection to their rights and welfare. Eight legged, four legged, or two legged land or sea animals do not comprehend the concept of rights. If we, humans, give animals “rights”, we are basically inferring the fact that we are like animals, and they have the entitlement to share our rights. Although they don’t understand rights, the fact that many of these animals are being treated inhumanely is wrong and animal welfare should be ingrained into this community rather than the massive inhumane treatment.

Animal rights are an important topic to discuss and review. The trouble is the vast diversity of how people see humans and animals and how they are different and yet the same. Animals are in every aspect of our lives in how they are utilized to make our lives easier, to sustain us, or as a pet. Unfortunately, the line of animals and humans blurs as the widely known belief that we are a derivation of an animal and we should treat them as we would ourselves. This viewpoint, however, can be taken to an extreme as we see pets that can be pampered quite a bit. Relating back to the four authors in our text, there is considerable controversy on how animals should be treated. While some interesting positions arise with the various authors, to