Sara D'Esposito
Professor Mary Pollock
JSEM Essay 2
17 October 2017
The Relationship Between Animal and Man
The article "Why Look At Animals" by John Berger is very engrossing in a way that it grabs the attention of the reader and brings one such thought. In the article, Berger thoroughly studies the gap between a man depending on an animal. He argues that humans have moved to a higher position above animals, and explains that this is because we as humans have an ability to surpass the range of our planet's natural environment. Berger brings attention to the fact that in earlier times when we first recognized animals, they were only seen simply as clothing, or a pair of horns, and things of this nature. He raises questions …show more content…
When he says the sad state, he means that these animals are sexually deprived, sterilized, and even goes as far as saying that these pets are being fed artificial food. He believes that modern pets no longer serve a purpose because these things, but he still believes that that pets still resembling their matters. Berger says that although humans do not have much contact with animals, they make up for the sad state that is explained in a way that they create animals of the mind. Examples of this include cartoons with animals, stuffed animals that look more realistic, and things of this nature. When a picture is taken of an animal by a human, it becomes apparent that we hold a power over animals and that there is a separation in what was once done without these artificial creations done by man. In response to this, Berger believes that a life of a wild animal is now just an idea. In modern times, children have become more disappointed when they go to the zoo. This is because animals are not interacting with these children, instead they are turning their backs and walking the other way. In addition to this, they are disappointed because they are surrounded by the creative animal imagery that Berger talks about, and animals in the zoo are not like this …show more content…
This video was about a couple of capuchin monkeys in two cages that joined together. When the monkey saw that they human had fruit on their person, the monkey would offer to trade a token for the human's fruit. One of the monkeys would receive a piece of fruit which was desired, while the other monkey would receive a piece of cucumber which was not as desired. When the monkey who received the cucumber realizes that it is not the desired fruit and that the other monkey got the fruit, the monkey became frustrated and threw the cucumber at the human who gave it to him (Moral Behavior in Animals, n.d.). What we can understand from this is that these monkeys are showing us a preference for fairness, and a sense of resistance when the fairness is absent. The point of this was to show that humans, no matter the inequality involved, have the same morals that these monkeys were showing. As children, we were always taught by our parents that we need to treat others how we want to be treated, sharing is caring, and things along these same lines and with this, children are often times with a preference of fairness and tend to protest when there is no fairness. What De Waall is trying to show with this experiment is that this major point in human psychology and human morals are also present in animals (Moral Behavior in Animals,
Professor Mary Pollock
JSEM Essay 2
17 October 2017
The Relationship Between Animal and Man
The article "Why Look At Animals" by John Berger is very engrossing in a way that it grabs the attention of the reader and brings one such thought. In the article, Berger thoroughly studies the gap between a man depending on an animal. He argues that humans have moved to a higher position above animals, and explains that this is because we as humans have an ability to surpass the range of our planet's natural environment. Berger brings attention to the fact that in earlier times when we first recognized animals, they were only seen simply as clothing, or a pair of horns, and things of this nature. He raises questions …show more content…
When he says the sad state, he means that these animals are sexually deprived, sterilized, and even goes as far as saying that these pets are being fed artificial food. He believes that modern pets no longer serve a purpose because these things, but he still believes that that pets still resembling their matters. Berger says that although humans do not have much contact with animals, they make up for the sad state that is explained in a way that they create animals of the mind. Examples of this include cartoons with animals, stuffed animals that look more realistic, and things of this nature. When a picture is taken of an animal by a human, it becomes apparent that we hold a power over animals and that there is a separation in what was once done without these artificial creations done by man. In response to this, Berger believes that a life of a wild animal is now just an idea. In modern times, children have become more disappointed when they go to the zoo. This is because animals are not interacting with these children, instead they are turning their backs and walking the other way. In addition to this, they are disappointed because they are surrounded by the creative animal imagery that Berger talks about, and animals in the zoo are not like this …show more content…
This video was about a couple of capuchin monkeys in two cages that joined together. When the monkey saw that they human had fruit on their person, the monkey would offer to trade a token for the human's fruit. One of the monkeys would receive a piece of fruit which was desired, while the other monkey would receive a piece of cucumber which was not as desired. When the monkey who received the cucumber realizes that it is not the desired fruit and that the other monkey got the fruit, the monkey became frustrated and threw the cucumber at the human who gave it to him (Moral Behavior in Animals, n.d.). What we can understand from this is that these monkeys are showing us a preference for fairness, and a sense of resistance when the fairness is absent. The point of this was to show that humans, no matter the inequality involved, have the same morals that these monkeys were showing. As children, we were always taught by our parents that we need to treat others how we want to be treated, sharing is caring, and things along these same lines and with this, children are often times with a preference of fairness and tend to protest when there is no fairness. What De Waall is trying to show with this experiment is that this major point in human psychology and human morals are also present in animals (Moral Behavior in Animals,