Animal Vegetable Miserable Rhetorical Analysis

895 Words4 Pages
Malnourished In his essay “Animal, Vegetable, Miserable” Gary Steiner attempts to argue that an 'ethical vegan' lifestyle is the most morally upright position to take on what he calls a “meat-crazed” society. Sadly, the author falls short on many points he attempts to make. Instead of evidence he prefers weak rants on morality, going so far as to insult those members of the populous with omnivorous leanings. Steiner begins stating two perceived arguments against his case which can be easily reduced to the belief that humans are greater than animals therefore are justified in consuming them, either for belief in gods or some intrinsic property of humanity that adds to their worth in nature. In doing this, he artfully commits both an false dichotomy fallacy and a straw man fallacy simultaneously, dividing his opponents into two camps and stating that the view of the a minority of people is indicative of the whole. Tragically, these slips in healthy rhetorical presentation are the first of many cognitive heresies the reader is bludgeoned with. The author, instead of attempting to provide counter arguments…show more content…
On this loose setting, Steiner's essay loses all pretenses of painting veganism as a legitimate alternative to meat consumption as he falls into a metaphorical cataract of “Woe is me and cruel is my enemy.” thinking. Citing the self inflicted difficulty of sustaining a vegan lifestyle in a once again “meat-crazed society”, The prevalence of animal products adds layers of toil on his day to day existence. While this may be a problem for his masochistic restraints, he goes on as if his readership is nodding along at his hardship, leaving him at a fourth fallacy; Missing

    More about Animal Vegetable Miserable Rhetorical Analysis

      Open Document