Jonathan Safran Foer Eating Animals Rhetorical Analysis

776 Words2 Pages

Eating Animals Rhetorical Analysis Jonathan Safran Foer wrote “Eating Animals” for his son; although, when he started writing it was not meant to be a book (Foer). More specifically to decide whether he would raise his son as a vegetarian or meat eater and to decide what stories to tell his son (Foer). The book was meant to answer his question of what meat is and how we get it s well as many other questions. Since the book is a quest for knowledge about the meat we eat, the audience for this book is anyone that consumes food. This is book is filled with research that allows the audience to question if we wish to continue to eat meat or not and provide answers as to why. Throughout the book Foer uses healthy doses of logos and pathos to effectively cause his readers to question if they will eat meat at their next meal and meals that follow. Foer ends his book with a call to action that states “Consistency is not required, but engagement with the problem is.” when dealing with the problem of factory farming (Foer). Jonathan Safran Foer uses pathos and logos to effectively draw negative emotions from the readers, which cause he or she to question his or her diet. In the book …show more content…

Durant argues that “ On the one hand, he hammers ethical meat-eaters because right now ethical meat accounts for such an insubstantial portion of meat that gets eaten.” after inserting a quote he continues by writing “ In the same chapter, only five short pages later, he lauds the influence of solitary vegetarians.” Durant points out that animal rights advocates don’t want anyone to eat animals even if it is ethically done. Later on he continues to say that Foer represents “Just about every urban-vegan-coastal-elite stereotype.” Durant believes that Foer is acting biased towards ethical meat alternatives and instead supports vegetarians even though both groups seem to small to make a

Open Document