Draft 1:
As you work through this project, be sure to explain in detail how your own ideas concerning ethics/values/what it means to be considerate fit with the texts you’ve selected. Part of your task here is to show me the trajectory of your thinking on food, culture, tradition, and behavior over the course vis-à-vis your own values, concerns, and ability to consider the complications of the world you live in.
Introduction:
Include 3 texts, introduce broad idea of moral obligation vs what we want, idea of complex moral universe, include david foster wallace claim
To begin, consider this question. Have you ever wanted to do something but knew it was wrong? If you’re looking for an answer, just about everyone would say yes. This is the basic concept of moral obligation. While it can occur in just about every form, with varying severity levels, everyone has had their share of these experiences. One of the most prevalent examples of this is through the way we eat. For instance, David Foster Wallace, the author of “Consider the Lobster” brings to the reader’s attention the cooking of lobsters.
Body: Summary of Wallace Claim, connect personal opinion
Body: Animals like us
In another piece of writing named “Animals like Us” —written by Hal Herzog— the topic of why we eat certain animals, and keep others as our pets is discussed.
Body: Animals like us + connection to against meat
Body: Caitlin Interview
Conclusion:
Draft 2:
Moral Obligation surrounding food, and their impact on changing human practices and culture.
Theme: How the increasing density of moral obligations among different cultures is challenging years of human practice, causing societal conflicts.
Introduction:
To begin, consider this question. Have you ever wanted to do something but knew it was wrong? If you’re looking for an answer, just about everyone would say yes. This is the basic concept of moral obligation. While it can occur in just about every form, with varying severity levels, everyone has had their share of these experiences. One of the most prevalent examples of this is through the way we eat. Now before I continue, here a few more questions to consider. Do you consider humans to be animals? Are there certain animals that are more acceptable to eat than others? Why? Anyway, these questions are just the few of many that have caused numerous different opinions, beliefs, and ideas over our dining habits.
In recent years, the number of people steering away from eating meat has fluctuated dramatically. This is largely due to the fact that we humans are gaining more knowledge about the animals we eat, thus creating stronger emotional bonds. As the number relationships between animals and humans continue to rise, so will the number of moral obligations surrounding our dining traditions. This often yields to intrapersonal conflicts, resulting in humans redefining their values to conform to these obligations. The degree of which this occurs varies from culture to culture, but there is no doubt that humans are faced with “lose lose” situation. Either we give up eating meat, and lose the values and practices we have used of the last several decades, or we continue eating meat and killing helpless animals in the process.
It is important to note that this is not specifically confined to animals such as cows and pigs, but also fish and smaller creatures. For instance, David Foster Wallace, the author of “Consider the Lobster” brings to the reader’s attention the cooking of lobsters. As humans, we often forget about how are food is prepared. Instead, we simply have the food prepared for us, and dig in. Lobster, being thought of as a high class meal, is a great example of this. The common way of cooking lobsters is to place them in a pot of boiling water, ALIVE. People don’t often consider this when slobbering over a fresh New England lobster tail. However, the people that are forced to cook these lobsters are faced with a harsh reality. Lobsters do feel pain, as Wallace says, and are simply boiled alive. While it may be easy to turn a shoulder and not pay attention to the fact you just put a live animal in its deathbed, there is no denying the moral obligation that comes along with it. This is what Wallace is trying to portray to the reader, this idea of new moral obligations conflicting with human traditions.
-cultures clashing
-hes not trying to raise opinion, just show how humans
Body: Summary of Wallace Claim, idea of moral obligation of placed on the maine community by outsiders with different practices
Body: Animals like us meaning,
In another piece of writing named “Animals like Us” —written by Hal Herzog— the topic of why we eat certain animals, and keep others as our pets is discussed.
Body: Against Meat, continuous changes between vegetarian and not, and how his kids are vegetarian as its morally right and how he cannot fully make the change.
Paper 3 – Exchange Draft
Connor Sirois
Professor Miller
ENG110-H2
19 November 2018
Do You Feel Obligated?
To begin, consider this question. Have you ever wanted to do something but knew it was wrong? If you’re looking for an answer, just about everyone would say yes. This is the basic concept of moral obligation. While it can occur in just about every form, with varying severity levels, everyone has had their share of these experiences. One of the most prevalent examples of this is through the way we eat. Now before I continue, here a few more questions to consider. Do you consider humans to be animals? Are there certain animals that are more acceptable to eat than others? Why? Anyway, these questions are just the few of many that have caused numerous different opinions, beliefs, and ideas over our dining habits.
In recent years, the number of people steering away from eating meat has fluctuated dramatically. This is largely due to the fact that we humans are gaining more knowledge about the animals we eat, thus creating stronger emotional bonds. As the number of relationships between animals and humans continues to rise, so will the number of moral obligations surrounding our dining traditions. This often yields to intrapersonal conflicts, resulting in humans redefining their values to conform to these obligations. The degree of which this occurs varies from culture to culture, but there is no doubt that humans are faced with “lose-lose” situation. Either we give up eating meat and lose the values and practices we have used of the last several decades, or we continue eating meat and killing helpless animals in the process.
It is important to note that this is not specifically confined to animals such as cows and pigs, but also fish and smaller creatures. For instance, David Foster Wallace, the author of “Consider the Lobster” brings to the reader’s attention the cooking of lobsters. Wallace’s writing mainly revolves around principles and events of the Maine Lobster Festival. Here, over the course of the 5 days of events, around 30,000 people visit the numerous tourist attractions. However, instead of promoting the event, Wallace has different thoughts about the event. As humans, we often forget about how our food is prepared. Instead, we simply have the food prepared for us, and dig in. Lobster, being thought of as a high class meal, is a great example of this. The common way of cooking lobsters is to place them in a pot of boiling water, ALIVE. People don’t often consider this when slobbering over a fresh New England lobster tail. However, the people that are forced to cook these lobsters are faced with a harsh reality. As Wallace says talking about these people “Even if you cover the kettle and turn away, you can usually hear the cover rattling and clanking as the Lobster tries to push it off” (Wallace 506). Lobsters do feel pain and definitely would not prefer to be boiled alive. While it may be easy to turn a shoulder and not pay attention to the fact you just put a live animal in its deathbed, there is no denying the moral obligation that comes along with it. This is what Wallace is trying to bring our attention to, this idea of new moral obligations conflicting with human traditions.
However, for some people, the boiling of a lobster, or killing of any animal may be part of everyday life. The Maine lobster fest is packed by people of all races, genders, and ages. Despite this, a majority of the attendees are from the local surrounding communities. In Eastern Maine, lobster is a major part of everyday life. Everyone is involved with it, whether its becoming a lobsterman, selling it in their store, or eating it weekly. Because of this, the act of boiling a lobster for the locals is like any other everyday activity, as it is a major part of their culture. On the other hand, there are a lot of tourist that flood the streets of the MLF as well. For these people, such as David Foster Wallace, the whole morality behind the event may not be perceived in the same way. While the locals consider the event a way to celebrate the lobster, people from other cultures see it as a mass slaughter of thousands of lobsters. Wallace introduces the idea of this culture clash throughout Consider the Lobster. Different cultures withhold different values, and when numerous cultures collide at an event such as the MLF, different moral obligations will arise on different people. Rather than trying to persuade the reader by his own personal views, Wallace is merely bringing cultures into context, explaining that different moral obligations come with different cultures, and this can cause a conflict in everyday human practice.
More generally, building off of Wallace’s thoughts, the way in which our human practices are impacted can have have large influence in how we live our lives. For example, in the New York Times article Against Meat, written by Jonathan Foer, the author explains how he is constantly changing his old practices into new ones. Foer mentions his grandmother, a WWII survivor who once survived of garbage scraps for food. Foer, on the other hand, has a different view on food. He took a philosophy course during high school which persuaded him to steer away from eating meat. However, this didn’t last long, as he returned to eating meat after graduating. This trend continued for years, continuously changing his ways of life. The reason behind Foer’s constant struggle with being a vegetarian was because of the clash of culture between his grandmother and the outside world. His grandmother places obligations towards not eating meat, as she always stuffed him full of it every meal. Foer had connected values to these meals, and this would be a challenging thing to give up. On the other hand, he had read about the brutal treatment of animals at farms, and all of the safety hazards they present. The outside world challenged his morality, knowing the treatment of animals wasn’t right.
However, Foer wasn’t experiencing this struggle alone, as it is a common test of morality for everyone. For example, while on a blind date with his future wife, he discovered other people felt this too, saying “Her history with meat was remarkably similar to mine: there were things she believed while lying in bed at night, and there were choices made at the breakfast table the next morning … Like me, she had intuitions that were very strong, but apparently not strong enough”. (Foer 4) Here, Foer gives us readers a first hand example on just how strong the moral obligation tied with eating meat is. Because of this, the way in which Foer practiced eating would be forever complicated. This challenge of human morality went so far for him that he would continue to eat some meat because he knew that he could not give up some of the values it withheld. However, because of the obligation to conform to society, and do what he felt was morally right, Foer raised his kids as vegetarians, as he could not make the full change himself.
While the idea that both Wallace and Foer preaches to the reader is not a very common theme throughout writing, it is not unique. Hal Herzog, the author of Animals Like Us, also shares a view on how the growing number of moral obligations between humans and animals are challenging certain human practices. One common idea from Herzog’s writing is
Conclusion: Connect all 3 points, refer back to thesis, ask questions
Final Draft
Connor Sirois
Professor Miller
ENG110-H2
19 November 2018
Do You Feel Obligated?
Have you ever wanted to do something but knew it was wrong? If you’re looking for an answer, just about everyone would say yes. This is the basic concept of moral obligation. While it can occur in just about every form, everyone has had their share of these experiences. One of the most prevalent examples of this is through the way we eat. Now before I continue, here a few more questions to consider. Do you consider humans to be animals? Are there certain animals that are more acceptable to eat than others? Why? Anyway, these questions are just the few of many that have caused numerous different opinions, beliefs, and ideas over our dining habits.
In recent years, the number of people steering away from eating meat has fluctuated dramatically. This is largely due to the fact that we humans are gaining more knowledge about the treatment of the animals we eat, thus creating stronger emotional bonds. As the relationships between animals and humans continues to become more personal, so will the number of moral obligations surrounding our dining traditions. This often yields to intrapersonal conflicts, resulting in humans being placed in the “troubled middle”. The degree of what’s considered moral or not varies from culture to culture, but there is no doubt that humans are faced with “lose-lose” situation. Either we give up eating meat and lose the values and practices we have used of the last several decades, or we continue eating meat and killing helpless animals in the process.
It is important to note that this is not specifically confined to animals such as cows and pigs, rather it involves even the smallest animals as much as the largest. For instance, David Foster Wallace, the author of “Consider the Lobster” brings to the reader’s attention the cooking of lobsters. Wallace’s writing mainly revolves around principles and events of the Maine Lobster Festival. Here, over the course of the 5 days of events, around tens of thousands of people visit the numerous tourist attractions. However, instead of promoting the event, Wallace has different thoughts about the event. As humans, we often forget about how our food is prepared. Instead, we simply have the food prepared for us, and dig in. Lobster, being thought of as a high class meal, is a great example of this. The common way of cooking lobsters is to place them in a pot of boiling water, ALIVE. The people that are forced to cook these lobsters are faced with a harsh reality. As Wallace says talking about these people “Even if you cover the kettle and turn away, you can usually hear the cover rattling and clanking as the Lobster tries to push it off” (Wallace 506). While its up in the air whether or not lobsters feel pain, they definitely would not prefer to be boiled alive. While it may be easy to turn a shoulder and not pay attention to the fact you just put a live animal in its deathbed, there is no denying the moral obligation that comes along with it. This is what Wallace is trying to bring our attention to, this idea of new moral obligations conflicting with human traditions. For some people the way we treat and eat animals is part of everyday life, and for the others its a disgrace against humanity.
However, for some people, the boiling of a lobster, or killing of any animal may be part of everyday life. The Maine lobster fest is packed by people of all races, genders, and ages. Despite this, a majority of the attendees are from the local surrounding communities. In Eastern Maine, lobster is a major part of everyday life. Everyone is involved with it, whether its becoming a lobsterman, selling it in their store, or eating it weekly. Because of this, the act of boiling a lobster for the locals is like any other everyday activity, as it is a major part of their culture. On the other hand, there are a lot of tourist that flood the streets of the MLF as well. For these people, such as David Foster Wallace, the whole morality behind the event may not be perceived in the same way. While the locals consider the event a way to celebrate the lobster, people from other cultures see it as a mass slaughter of thousands of lobsters. Wallace introduces the idea of this culture clash throughout Consider the Lobster. Different cultures withhold different values, and when numerous cultures collide at an event such as the MLF, different moral obligations will arise on different people. Rather than trying to persuade the reader by his own personal views, Wallace is merely bringing cultures into context, explaining that different moral obligations come with different cultures, and this can cause a conflict in everyday human practice, creating the so-called “troubled middle”.
Building off of Wallace’s thoughts, the New York Times article Against Meat, written by Jonathan Foer, explains how he is constantly changing his old practices into new ones, representing the troubled middle. Foer mentions his grandmother, a WWII Holocaust survivor who once survived of garbage scraps for food. Because of these experiences, she made sure her family never had the same struggles she had in finding food. Foer, on the other hand, is soon placed in the troubled middle when he takes a philosophy course during high school which persuaded him to steer away from eating meat. However, this didn’t last long, as he returned to eating meat after graduating. This trend continued for years, continuously changing his ways of life. The reason behind Foer’s constant struggle with being a vegetarian was because of the clash of culture between his grandmother and the outside world. His grandmother was all for eating meat, saying “No foods are bad for you. Sugars are great. Fats are tremendous. The fatter a child is, the fitter it is — especially if it’s a boy. Lunch is not one meal, but three, to be eaten at 11, 12:30 and 3. You are always starving” (Foer 2). As a result of the years spent eating the food his grandmother cooked, Foer connected values to these meals. Some of these values would turn out to be irreplaceable, creating a moral obligation to continue eating these meals to remember his grandmother’s legacy. On the other hand, Foer had read about the brutal treatment of animals at farms, and all of the safety hazards they present. The outside world challenged his morality, knowing the treatment of animals wasn’t right.
However, Foer wasn’t experiencing this struggle alone, as it is a common test of morality for everyone. For example, while on a blind date with his future wife, he discovered other people felt this too, saying “Her history with meat was remarkably similar to mine: there were things she believed while lying in bed at night, and there were choices made at the breakfast table the next morning … Like me, she had intuitions that were very strong, but apparently not strong enough”. (Foer 4) The neverending battle between either ignoring the knowledge we have about the treatment of animals and eating them, or not eating them and loosing a huge part of human culture may not have a correct answer. Personally, I share many of the feelings Foer does. I eat meat almost everyday, and don’t have a problem with it. However, I have never been to an animal farm, because I hate seeing animals get killed. For example, fishing has been a major part of my life since I was a little boy. What separates me from most people is I always let the fish go that I catch, and I never eat the fish I catch. I feel way too morally obligated to let the fish go, and could not get myself to kill it with my bare hands. Despite this, if it is placed on my plate, I feel no obligation in eating the meat. This is a first hand example on how we as humans are affected by numerous obligations, and how these obligations have changed different human practices. Everyone has the same decision to make, our varying cultures decide what’s right or wrong.
While the idea that both Wallace and Foer preaches to the reader is not a very common theme throughout writing, it is not unique. Hal Herzog, the author of Animals Like Us, also shares a view on how the growing number of moral obligations between humans and animals are challenging certain human practices. In Animals Like Us, Herzog brings introduces Judith Black, who has a PhD in anthropology, and considered herself a vegetarian. After being faced with a delicious meal being put in front of her, which included some of her favorite flavors, but also meat, she caved in. Herzog writes “In an instant, 15 years of moral high ground went down the drain. (“I am a sucker for raspberries,” Judith told me.) The taste of roasted grouse opened the floodgates, and there was no going back. Within a week, she was chowing down on cheeseburgers. Judith had joined the ranks of ex-vegetarians, a club that outnumbers current vegetarians in the United States by a ratio of three to one.” This event signifies way more than one person, it represents everyone who becomes vegetarian. The temptations are real, but are the moral obligations enough to keep us from these temptations? Or in Wallace’s case is the boiling of lobsters alive for own own personal needs justified by our need to eat? Whether its Foer’s or Wallace’s example We are truly stuck in the troubled middle, no matter your culture or beliefs.
There is no denying the density of the numerous moral obligations placed on humans everyday. Herzog, Foer and Wallace all bring up this idea of the troubled middle, and exactly what it means to be human. While people in different cultures have different views, everyone is obligated in one way or another. I feel it is only fair to conclude In the words of Herzog, stating “Like most people, I am conflicted about our ethical obligations to animals. The philosopher Strachan Donnelley calls this murky ethical territory “the troubled middle.” Those of us in the troubled middle live in a complex moral universe. I eat meat—but not as much as I used to, and not veal. I oppose testing the toxicity of oven cleaner and eye shadow on animals, but I would sacrifice a lot of mice to find a cure for cancer” (Herzog 5). No matter if you eat meat, or if you are vegan, there is no denying the obligations in whatever side you choose. I know that I can only eat meat if I don’t see the animal get killed, and I’m sure im not alone.
Works Cited
Foer, Jonathan. Against Meat. NY Times. 7 October 2009. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/11/magazine/11foer-t.html
Herzog, Hal. Animals like us. UTNE Reader. August 2011. https://www.utne.com/environment/animals-like-us-human-pet-relationships
Wallace, David Foster. Consider The Lobster. New York. Little, Brown, Published 2005.
