Assignment 7 - The premise he used was torturing puppies...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Emily Leung AD08 Josh Moulton October 28 th , 2009 In the reading “Puppies, Pigs and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases” by Alastair Norcross, argues the moral question why it is not okay to abuse dogs but it is okay to mass produce and sell other meats, such as chicken and beef who also get tortured as well. The dilemma was a story about Fred, who was torturing puppies by mutilating them because he wanted the cocoamone located in the puppies to get the gustatory satisfaction chocolate use to give him before his accident. The author then brings up the topic of factory farming and relates it to the situation, and comes to a conclusion. Basically the author states: if torturing puppies for gustatory pleasure is wrong then supporting factory farmers is wrong.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: The premise he used was torturing puppies for gustatory pleasure is wrong, therefore supporting factory farming is wrong. Along with the authors conclusion he also mentioned other different scenarios to help demonstrate the issue in a different perspective. I think the author did a good job supporting his argument because it was well thought out, and it had a lot of supporting evidence. The premises were all true and it made sense to ask the audience why it is not okay to torture puppies but it is okay to torture other animals for the gustatory sense. Overall the author had a nice argument and did not fail executing their point of view....
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 10/26/2011 for the course PHIL 164 at UMass (Amherst).

Ask a homework question - tutors are online