"The best way to observe a fish is to become a fish" stated by Jacques Yves Cousteau, Oceanographer. No one really understands what animals in the ocean and animals in captivity feel, therefore these two opposing viewpoints try to find which is better for the animal. One opposing viewpoint is keeping marine mammals captive in theme parks promotes conservation. The other viewpoint believes keeping marine mammals captive in theme parks is cruel. Both viewpoints are strong, but keeping marine mammals captive in theme parks is cruel is the strongest viewpoint.
One reason why the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society has a better argument is because they are a more credible author. George Mannina is an attorney who fought the case that believes keeping marine animals in captivity promotes conservation. Mannina has fought many cases about the environment. Mannina has the weaker argument because he doesn't focus …show more content…
Mannina states mostly facts with topics such as: The Role of Public Display Facilities, The Value of Education, Teaching the Importance of Conservation, and The Need for Research. These topics do not make the reader feel compelled to go out and help these animals like the WDCS does. One emotional appeal that the WDCS uses is when the parks say ¨whales and dolphins in captivity have forgotten how to live in the wild¨ (page 204) and the WDCS comes back and says ¨Whales and dolphins are intelligent creatures, if they can learn tricks that aren't necessary for survival then they can learn how to be wild again.¨ (page 204) Another emotional appeal is when the park says ¨our animals are happy¨ (page 203) and the WDCS comes back with ¨dolphins have a natural smile on their face, they also die smiling.¨ (page 203) These emotional appeals make the reader feel sorry for the animal and maybe make the reader feel wrong if they have participated in watching captive marine
One reason why the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society has a better argument is because they are a more credible author. George Mannina is an attorney who fought the case that believes keeping marine animals in captivity promotes conservation. Mannina has fought many cases about the environment. Mannina has the weaker argument because he doesn't focus …show more content…
Mannina states mostly facts with topics such as: The Role of Public Display Facilities, The Value of Education, Teaching the Importance of Conservation, and The Need for Research. These topics do not make the reader feel compelled to go out and help these animals like the WDCS does. One emotional appeal that the WDCS uses is when the parks say ¨whales and dolphins in captivity have forgotten how to live in the wild¨ (page 204) and the WDCS comes back and says ¨Whales and dolphins are intelligent creatures, if they can learn tricks that aren't necessary for survival then they can learn how to be wild again.¨ (page 204) Another emotional appeal is when the park says ¨our animals are happy¨ (page 203) and the WDCS comes back with ¨dolphins have a natural smile on their face, they also die smiling.¨ (page 203) These emotional appeals make the reader feel sorry for the animal and maybe make the reader feel wrong if they have participated in watching captive marine