Rifkins Rhetorical Analysis - 803 Words

In discussion of inhumane treatment, a controversial issue is whether animals are entitled to their rights. While some argue that only humans have rights, others contend that animals should have the same privileges as humans. The author of â€Å"A Change of Heart about Animals,† Jeremy Rifkin, claims that animals should have better treatment. Rifkin rhetorically changes one’s view on this subject without the consent of the reader. Rifkin begins by showing the animals’ human qualities, then giving a counter statement to common objections, and finally ends it by utilizing negative language. Rifkin’s eloquent strategy is to note the similarities between animals and humans. Rifkin mentions Koko, a 300-pound gorilla. Koko was able to learn sign†¦show more content†¦It is more likely that readers will accept the main argument because after comparing animals to humans, Rifkin suddenly strikes them with such a negative tone that makes one regret the way a nimals are being treated. It makes the reader more likely to want to feel compassionate to animals and treat them the way we want to be treated. Rifkin utilizes many more strategies in order to persuade people to lean towards his opinion. Giving animals human qualities, giving a counter statement to common objections, and using negative language is what made people realize that inhumane treatment to animals should be stopped. Noticing the similarities animals and humans share makes one think that animals are just like us and should have the privileges we do. Giving a counter statement to a common objection leaves one with less doubt about animal treatment than the ones they had before reading Rifkin’s writing. Setting a negative tone after comparing animals and humans sets one up to believe that animals are entitled to their human rights. Animals have suffered for many years because of inhumane treatment and it is time that this is put to an