Rogerian Argument

Arthur’s argument was that it is unacceptable that living beings have become an object for processing. He was shocked and outraged by the inhumane treatment of the livestock, which feeds America. The genetic modification of the chickens is especially atrocious. The poor animals could barely take three steps without falling to the ground because their overly large bodies are too heavy for their premature bones. The production of food has regressed to a point that is inhumane and should not be allowed. The four super-corporations that dominate the industry are too far removed from what it is they control and something has to change.

The demand for meat in America is extremely high. There are many levels of profit made from the meat production market and therefore it is important for it to function as cheaply and efficiently as possible. It is unrealistic for the industry to be regulated to the point where the treatment of animals is more important that the swift production of the meat. It only makes sense to combine the corn and meat industry and to feed the animals the easily accessible corn. The genetic modification of the animals is just another way to speed up and condense the process.

Since the arguments oppose each other very strongly, it could be tricky to come up with a compromise. One way this could be done is by separating the four main producers into more, smaller companies. With less to oversee, there would be more time for assessing the living conditions of the livestock and creating ways to purify the process. It is understandable that the demand for meat is high and growing, but the integrity and morality of the production needs to be kept. If the public were informed about who their meat is produced by and how it is done, then the profit of the industry would be determined by the public’s choice of whom they buy from. The companies would have no choice but to adhere to the demands of the public for a safer and more humane process if they wanted to continue making substantial profit.

Hungry Corporate Giant: The New Farmer

I was a vegetarian until I was eleven years old. I grew up on tofu and brown rice, but always begged my parents to let me eat meat. I longed for a hamburger at a friend’s cookout, or a steak in a nice restaurant. Finally I did try some and loved it. I have eaten meat since then, however watching Food Inc. has tempted me to become a vegetarian once again. The disgusting treatment of the animals that produce our meat products was absolutely appalling. It is clear through viewing this film that the production of meat and corn is an industry and no longer can be considered “farming.” The animals involved are not even treated as living beings. They live in filth and discomfort, are forced to eat an unnatural diet, and are killed inhumanely. Not only is this horrible for the animals, but as the film shows, harmful bacteria and disease is transmitted into our meat as a result of this process. I understand that the demand for meat in the American diet is high, but is it worth risking our own safety and morals to meet it? I personally think not.

The Shenandoah farmer who remained true to the more traditional ways of farming inspired me. Perhaps it appears this way because the film intended to steeply contrast the two methods for the purpose of making its point, but the feeling I got listening to what the farmer had to say and viewing the shots of his land was one of serenity and calm. Yes, the reality is that animals are slaughtered for food and this is not a pleasant reality, however, knowing that his livestock are kept free-range and are given their natural diet, makes me feel much more comfortable with the practice. If we are going to continue eating meat, this is the way it needs to be produced.

I realize this documentary is biased against the large industry of food production, but for its purposes, I felt that the film was well done. The exposure of how much corruption is inherent in the system reminded me eerily of the behind-the-scenes goings on exposed in Inside Job. The two industries have seemingly nothing to do with one another, however the common factor is immense greed. If there is such a high demand for food, of course the industry is going to try to make the processes as efficient as possible, even if it means compromising the integrity of the work or the quality of the product. There definitely needs to be a shift in the way that things are done regarding the food that feeds the majority of our population. It is another one of those issues that feels overwhelming, but I think as citizens we can begin by holding our agents accountable for our health and safety with which we entrust them. 

Research Paper Outline

Potential outline for paper: I'm interested in the traditions of storytelling and folklore in the American Indian culture. I'm not positive it will be an appropriate topic for my research paper, but I am hoping that I can do some research and form a thesis from what I find. Until then, this is the basis for the research I will be starting.

Claim:

An exploration of American Indian storytelling/folklore

Support:

-Is there a similar formula for the stories?

-Purpose of storytelling, who did the telling? Who passed down the stories?

            -How storytelling connects to other traditions/rituals

-Differences in stories and story telling among different tribes (NE, NW, SE, SW)

            -Creation

            -Animals native to the different regions?

-Compare/contrast to American stories (children’s stories?)

-Explore motifs

-Purpose of stories (ex. Teaching morals or otherwise?)

-Any aspects adopted from American Indian tradition by the colonists?

-Were any stories created around the colonists? (positive or negative)

            -If so, how was the “white man” portrayed?

Warrant:

-Did stories/traditions survive the colonization period?

-If so, any particularly famous ones? (In the Cherokee area specifically)

-Importance of keeping tradition alive?