Easterbrook's Science vs. Religion

I agree with Easterbrook's framing of the debate. There has always been much controversy revolving around the creation of the world and all those inhabit it. It's fair to compare God with science because those are two of the most prominent answers to the unknown. The idea that God created the Earth and brought life works directly against the scientific notion that there was some sort of process, not just some religious beginning. There is a scientific standard to education and one of the topics Easterbrook touches on is the spontaneous formation of life. He goes on to explain that it should be taught in schools because it is a well-known theory regarding the creation of the Earth, whether or not it is truly is accurate is the source of the debate. Easterbrook proceeds to explain the Supreme Court's decision to rule that public schools must not teach creationism as part of the curriculum because it is part of a religious doctrine; one that has no physical evidence to support its integrity. Easterbrook's comparison is highly effective in the concepts he compares. God could be considered the "head" of religion, while the head of the biology department would serve as the primary leader of sciences within a school system. Both God and the head of the biology department can be seen as the "top-ranking" officials of their respected fields so to speak. The question of origin is open to interpretation on many levels. Easterbrook makes a fair comparison because God would be the answer to religious followers, while science would be the answer to those who are seeking a more "logical" or plausible viewpoint.

Pollan: Part II

As Pollan's argument continues, he begins to go into greater detail and emphasis pertaining to the slaughter industry. He provides the reasons why and how animal rights have been abused and disregarded. Pollan does however defend the eating of meat in our history and culture; he shows that it is somewhat essential to the evolution of mankind. He defends both sides of the argument throughout the essay and convinces the audience that he understands where different people are coming from on the issue. An interesting point that Pollan makes is the fact that it would be very difficult for us all to be vegetarians and that it is better for our society to be filled with omnivores, carnivores, and herbivores. The existence of all three types of diets keeps our world at a balance. If carnivores or herbivores did not exist, then it is almost inevitable that different aspects of our planet, including the food chain, would be drastically altered.

Pollan's piece of writing did not have the substantial impact on me I thought it would in the beginning of the reading. I still find myself at this point ready and willing to eat meat at any given time, regardless of Pollan's argument for animal rights. I think maybe I would be better persuaded if some sort of concrete visual accompanied the piece, specifically a documentary film that depicts how animal cruelty is a big part of the commercial slaughterhouse structure. I know a remarkably high number of people who have been convinced into becoming vegetarians after seeing similar films which brings me to wonder if simple words do not do the Pollan's piece justice.

Pollan: Part One

I agree with J.R. that Pollan's argument "embodies all the principles of a fair and principled rhetoric, grabbing both the mind and heart." Pollan's argument uses a wide variety of both pathos and logos to convey his argument regarding animal cruelty. From what I have read thus far, his logical appeal provokes one to think about numerous questions he has put forth throughout his piece. The moment that stands out the most in my mind is when Pollan discusses the chimpanzee compared to the mentally retarded. Why should an equally intelligent primate be tested upon just because he or she is not a human being? Pollan sees both sides of the argument and puts for the notion that there is multiple ways of looking at the situation. Pollan claims that his first line of defense was "animals kill one another all the time. Why treat animals more ethnically than they treat one another?” Pollan then proceeds to understand that animals do an assortment of activities that human beings tend to frown upon in our society; such as rape and murder. Pollan comments on the fact that countless dogs will receive Christmas gives this season, but most pigs will not. The idea that we would give gifts to a dog rather than pig just because pigs are typically raised to be eaten is depressing. Pigs are just as intelligent as dogs, but their characteristics differ greatly causing us to view them in entirely different way then we view "man's best friend". Pollan persistently continues to find his defenses shot down as he continues to find ways in order to defend his take on animal cruelty. Pollan's piece encompasses both arguments, for and against animal cruelty, a technique that leaves little to be said; rebuttal cannot be strong if the author has already addressed both sides of the argument with evidence and examples.

Nguyen Reader Response

There are numerous parts of Bich Minh Nguyen's essay that I can relate to as a child. I can recall how the gold stars in some classrooms made students stand out on a daily basis; how they made one feel at the end of the day. I was a pretty average student for the most part, neither poor nor great, but the stars constantly reminded me where I stood in comparison with the other students. At times the stars would fill with me with a sense of achievement and accomplishment, but other times they would leave me envying other students who seemed to be excelling at a far quicker rate than I. Nguyen's essay contains many truths that are evident throughout her work, specifically when she discusses how the teacher often singles out one student presumably because of their race or ethnicity. I can also remember being very shy when I was younger, much like Nguyen. I can recollect memories of earlier grades where I would say absolutely nothing in fear of the teacher calling on me or shining the spotlight in my direction in any way. I vividly remember others kids, such as Cory Park, with their defiant attitude towards authority and anything it might represent. I always wanted a bit of that insubordinate nature that they possessed.

Bich Minh Nguyen does an excellent job of incorporating personal experience into her essay. Almost the entire essay is founded upon her experiences as a Vietnamese child growing up in a predominately white America in the 1970s. The essay flows at a pace that keeps one interested and is filled with a substantial amount of her own character development as well as her family, teachers, and classmates. The language and emotion conveyed within the essay appears to be very authentic and filled with a lot of sentiment. Nguyen presents multiple situations that the majority of readers can readily identify with growing up in schools across the US and abroad.