An Animal's Place Vs Omnivore

Agriculture has been a significant aspect of humans lives since the beginning of time. Throughout the years farming has changed exceedingly for various reasons. In the passages “An Animal’s Place” by Michael Pollan and “The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-intellectuals” by Blake Hurst, both the ethical and inferior sides of farming are explained and the differences in industrial and organic farming is discussed. Although the authors have different opinions of farming, both passages are beneficial in learning the in’s and out’s of farming.
As can be seen in the passage “An Animal’s Place,” Michael Pollan believes that American animal farming is exceedingly repulsive and inhumane, but also suggest that there are various ways to improve …show more content…
The authors agree that changing farming will increase prices causing many people to go without meat. Pollan proclaims that humanely raised food will be expensive and only the well-to-do will be able to afford morally defensible animal protein. Hurst has a corresponding response and states “...people are now hungry because of increasing food prices. Only “industrial farming” can possibly meet the demands of an increasing population and increased demand for food as a result of growing incomes” (Hurst). However the two authors disagree on animals lives in industries. Pollan describes industrial animal farms as “Our own worst nightmare” (369) and his most compelling evidence is tail-docking and beak-clipping, he considers animals born into production units to be unlucky. On the other hand, Hurst believes that human cannot change nature, and by changing the way these animals are raised their lives will be undermined. To emphasize this issue he states “Pigs will be allowed to ‘return to their mire,’ as Kipling had it, but they’ll also be crushed and eaten by their mothers. Chickens will provide lunch to any number of predators, and some number of chickens will die as flocks establish their pecking order” (Hurst). Ultimately both passages give insight into farming and explain the reasons for their …show more content…
I have always believed in animal rights and still do, although now I see that advocating for animal welfare would be much more beneficial. Hurst article made me see the reality of farming and how mankind could not survive without it. Coupled with Pollan’s belief that animals should die with the respect they deserve, I have come to see that animals deserve to be treated with respect and to die the same and only then can one eat them knowing it is morally right. In conclusion, Pollan believes that there are ways one can limit the meat they eat to nonindustrial animals to coincide with their morals, while Hurst believes today’s society should learn more about farming before coming to harsh conclusion about