John Vs Dalton

Vivisection is the dissection of living animals for experimental purposes. Vivisection has been around for over 2000 years. However, it was not until the 18th century when the use of research animals in laboratory became widespread in Europe. Since then, animal experimentation has been one of the most debated issues because some people think that vivisection is an immoral and cruel thing while others think that it is necessary. While John Dalton supports vivisection and thinks it is necessary for humans to learn more, Frances Cobbe thinks that vivisection is not only cruel, but also morally wrong. After reading both authors’ work, John Dalton’s work is ultimately more structured and persuasive to his audience than Frances Cobbe’s chaos and
He was graduated at the medical department of Harvard University. He became a professor of physiology in the University of Buffalo, and was the first professor in the United States to teach vivisection. As a physiology Dalton supports vivisection and thinks that it is necessary for humans to learn more from vivisection and to improve from it. Therefore, he wrote “vivisection” in 1866 to be read before other physicians and physiologists in the New York Academy of Medicine. Dalton wrote “vivisection” to persuade people that vivisection is actually not that cruel and is needed for humans to improve and to discover new things that would help the entire human race. In his speech, Dalton gives a variety of examples and lots of reasoning to defend vivisection so that people will accept
The audience can tell that Dalton has a medical background and has a respectable reputation; therefore he himself already has lots of creditability. Dalton recognizes that cruelty is the main concern of the opposed audience, so he has to start with cruelty. “First, as to its cruelty. The injustice of this charge may be appreciated, when we remember the aim and motive of all such experiments” . If he can’t show that vivisection is not cruel, then the other advantages of vivisection won’t really matter that much anymore. Dalton writes in such a way to not make the audience dislike the work, he offers rebuttal to every point he makes, but then he will ultimately backs his own point again. Moreover, because most of his audience has a medical background, Dalton does not have to spend that much of an effort to convince the other side. It is more like reassuring the people in what they believe