Alina Rae Alanis
Ellie Francis
English 1302
February 28, 2016
Analyzing Foers’ Eating Dog
As a huge dog lover and frequent volunteer at the Humane society, I know first-hand how hard it is for people to adopt companion dogs especially after most of the dogs have lived almost a full life. Although our society would most likely disagree with eating their furry friends, Jonathan Foer, does have solutions as to why we ought to consider dogs as a meat source. In an excerpt from Eating Animals, “A Case for Eating Dogs”, Foer explains why it should be more socially acceptable to eat companion animals, just like any other farm animal, despite how we morally feel about the idea. Throughout, the excerpt Foer relies less on any real factual evidence and leans more to rhetorical listening and challenging the current beliefs society holds toward the expectations and customs of eating a dog.
In his excerpt, Foer uses many rhetorical devices to help support his claim and …show more content…
In the article “Flesh of Your Floods”, Foer neither has the authority or experience to write on the topic when most of early childhood and adult life choose not to consume meat, “During high school and college, he converted to vegetarianism several more times, partly to salve his conscience...” (Kolbert 3). If Foer is trying to convince, those who consume meat, to why they should consider dog for dinner is considered to be an opposing argument to his claim. In comparison to Foer demeaning and straight forward tone he seems to very persuasive to change the perception of what both meat lovers and vegetarians consume. Despite using any terms such as “we” or “us” until the very last two pages of the excerpt, Foer lets the reader take an insight on his own stubbornness views that may connect to the audiences when he says, “Can’t we get over our sentimentality?” (Foer
Ellie Francis
English 1302
February 28, 2016
Analyzing Foers’ Eating Dog
As a huge dog lover and frequent volunteer at the Humane society, I know first-hand how hard it is for people to adopt companion dogs especially after most of the dogs have lived almost a full life. Although our society would most likely disagree with eating their furry friends, Jonathan Foer, does have solutions as to why we ought to consider dogs as a meat source. In an excerpt from Eating Animals, “A Case for Eating Dogs”, Foer explains why it should be more socially acceptable to eat companion animals, just like any other farm animal, despite how we morally feel about the idea. Throughout, the excerpt Foer relies less on any real factual evidence and leans more to rhetorical listening and challenging the current beliefs society holds toward the expectations and customs of eating a dog.
In his excerpt, Foer uses many rhetorical devices to help support his claim and …show more content…
In the article “Flesh of Your Floods”, Foer neither has the authority or experience to write on the topic when most of early childhood and adult life choose not to consume meat, “During high school and college, he converted to vegetarianism several more times, partly to salve his conscience...” (Kolbert 3). If Foer is trying to convince, those who consume meat, to why they should consider dog for dinner is considered to be an opposing argument to his claim. In comparison to Foer demeaning and straight forward tone he seems to very persuasive to change the perception of what both meat lovers and vegetarians consume. Despite using any terms such as “we” or “us” until the very last two pages of the excerpt, Foer lets the reader take an insight on his own stubbornness views that may connect to the audiences when he says, “Can’t we get over our sentimentality?” (Foer