May I strongly remind you humans are note animals! By killing puppies we will not learn about ourselves! Why must we inflict this torture? Are we really the "elite species on the planet?" (549). Euthanizing mice by putting them in a tank that “when [it] was turned on, all oxygen was eliminated from the cage and the mice essentially suffocated to death” is absolutely disgusting. Further this author declared that “then a scalpel was inserted into the lung of each mouse to ensure the animal would not revive later. The process was extremely fast and the most humane way to euthanize mice” (558). If this is such a humane way to kill mice, then why do we not do that to dying patients in hospitals or prisoners suffering the death penalty? We as humans do not do this to ourselves because it is not humane! We cannot assume that they are “dumb animals, and so they are, for they cannot tell us how they feel, but they d not suffer less because they have no words” (555).
The student essay regarding the study of Japanese Quails to determine their sexual behavior and its effects on learning and memory is an extreme form of murder for ridiculous scientific advancement (553). A male quail was put in a cage with a normal looking female and a female with unnatural red feathers. After the male quail is excited and mates with the female with red feathers these birds must die so that humans can examine their brains. The quails “did not receive sedation or anesthetic as those chemicals would conflict with the aims of the experiment” (553). Rather they just had their heads cut off and the researcher peeled the skin off the bird’s head to get to its brain. The student admitted that “often the bird would release a final movement as this occurred (553). I agree that its “nonsense to say that the animals do not suffer because they have a lower order of intelligence. Paint is pain, conveyed by nerves to the brain (591). But don’t worry, science prevailed and discovered something miraculous. When the quail mated with a female he perceived to be different, “neurotransmitters generate initial excitement and interest” (555). So now we have killed hundreds of birds to find out that they get excited about mating with females who appear different. What a scientific advancement that the University of Texas is sponsoring.
Overall, I believe that Lewis Carroll maintains the same position on animals in his essay on Vivisection that he does in the Alice in Wonderland books. It is obvious that Carroll supports neither those opposed to vivisection nor the scientific community that supports it. He only cares about the animals that shape his children’s literature. This stance is obvious in his essay as he provides an account falsifying fallacies that both parties cling to. He claims that “man has an absolute right to inflict death on animals, without assigning any reason, provided that it be a painless death, but that any infliction of pain needs its special justification” (542). The first part of this quote is absolute fact. Man does have the right to kill animals just as they have the right to kill us. The second part contains the moral and ethical clause that the killing must be a “painless death” and needs “justification.” When conquering the fallacy “that it is fair to compare the aggregates of pain,” Carroll takes neither party’s position and claims that it is illogical for a “very large number of trivial wrongs [to be] equal to one great one” (543). The unbiased viewpoint in this essay puts both supporters and opposers of Vivisection on the bench to view their wrongs. While Carroll does not support vivisection, he also does not pledge allegiance to anti-vivisection supporters because of their limited view of animal rights. Rather, Carroll supports animals as a whole and is able to approach this matter realistically by presenting the pros and cons of each stance. Overall, Carroll is an all-around animal supporter that seeks to present their equality in his Alice in Wonderland books.
No comments:
Post a Comment