Jeremy Rifkin’s Rhetorical Strategies
Is it right to take the life of an innocent animal? Animals have been burnt, crushed, sliced, poisoned with toxic chemicals, and tormented in psychological testing. They do all these tests just to make money or find if a chemical is safe for humans. Lab experimentation involving animals is inhumane. In discussion of inhumane treatment, a controversial issue is whether animals are entitled to their rights. On the one hand, some argue that only humans have rights; however, others argue that animals should have the same privileges as humans. The author of “A Change of Heart about Animals,” Jeremy Rifkin, claims that animals should have better treatment and that we should treat them more humanly and we should expand animal’s right. He emphasizes on how animals should have better treatment due to the lack of compassion and acknowledgment. He uses distinctive types of rhetorical techniques to persuade his audience to agree and feel his pain for these creatures. Rifkin rhetorically changes one’s view on this subject without the consent of the reader. For instance, Rifkin begins by explaining for the readers certain types of evidence to increase their likelihood of accepting his argument. The second strategy that Rifkin use is the use of animal’s names in his article. Lastly, Rifkin uses pathos in his writing to get emotional feedback from the reader.
One of the strategies that Rifkin used is providing some types of evidence for the readers to increase their likelihood of accepting his argument. For example, he used examples that have a great deal of credibility, such as using animals that are almost as intelligent as humans and including studies from universities and educational references. For instance, he mentions Koko, a 300-pound gorilla. Koko was able to learn sign language, and yet some people never even learn how to communicate in sign language. Rifkin also notes the similarity between rats and humans. He states,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document