I find myself writing small bits of project 2 as I get time to sit down and think harder about the project than the first one. I think that writing project 2 has been a lot more difficult so far because the complexity of the articles we are working with require a lot more thought. I have been trying to write in a more dense context to keep my word count to a manageable amount. Recently I have been reading a certain author and In the most simple way I find myself thinking about writing in a style to sort of mimic his style. Structurally I have been writing more for the big picture, originally writing in bigger blocks, now I’m trying to build my introduction and keep in mind that what is in my introduction will have to follow in my topic sentences in the meat of my essay. I have found that finding quotations to relate my main topics to has been easier in this draft process. I think that knowing the Barclay formula and keeping in mind the outline as you are pulling sentences out already knowing that I will be able to explain the quote and back it up with another source. This both streamlines the writing process, but takes more time to be able to get the write quotes out of these dense sources. I think that once I get my idea’s flowing and am able to connect both of the essays through multiple body paragraphs, I will be able to put everything together much more efficiently than paper 1. I find myself going back to the texts a lot more in pursuit of finding the differences and similarities to pick out and compare between the two authors. For the future I think I can see myself having to put more time into paper two simply because of the complexity of work, and the struggle to find the right words to fit how i actually think is always a process.
There is, and probably will forever be, an ongoing debate over people’s willingness to be considerate. There is no right or wrong to a person’s beliefs, and everyone has a limit to how considerate they are inclined to be. However, many struggle to see the reasons behind a person’s ethical standings towards some plants and animals. Everyone sees the environment and the animals differently. Some believe that they are something that needs to be protected at all costs, and others see them as objects with the only purpose of keeping humans alive. But there is a grey area in this discussion. A middle ground that sees plants and animals as both food and living things. Not every person needs to pick a side in the ethical battle of whether humans should consider the well-being of every animal they want to eat. David Foster Wallace brings up the point that people avoid thinking about the ethics behind eating animals, and it is true. When a person makes the decision to cook a lobster, most of the time they just throw it into the pot without thinking of the moral implications of doing so. This is because people have limitations of how considerate they are willing to be. These limitations vary between people. I am the first to admit that I am not a vegetarian. I enjoy having meat in my diet, but that does not mean that I support the slaughtering of all animals. I certainly could never be the one to kill them, and I know that there are many out there who feel the same way. People avoid thinking about the pain and suffering that some animals feel when they die, and many are considerate to an extent. A large number of people see many things as morally less important than human beings, and that is not just directed toward animals. The environment is one thing that a lot of people choose not to think about. There are people whose limits of being considerate end on the planet. It is seen as the home to all living things, but the health of our ecosystems is not always considered. Some are unwilling to consider the environment as something that needs to be protected. There are even people who draw their lines at other humans. Sometimes those who stand higher up in life choose not to be considerate of those who are not as well off. Every person has their own beliefs as to what is ethically right and wrong, and this plays a massive role in how much thought is put into some decisions. There are many factors that determine whether a person is willing to be considerate.
While beggining my first pieces of writing for project #2 this one especially has me excited. I feel like there’s a huge grey area when it comes to writing this and I can really get creative with this and respond how I’d like to. I plan on talking about my relationship with food, but on the other end how I feel about animals and about how they’re not always represented correctly in the food industry. The piece of text I plan on using is “What The Crows Know”, and talking about DFW’s text along with it. I want to use what it said in “What The Crows Know”, and discuss how smart animals are, and that they do understand the tortuting process that goes along with cooking them as food. I also want to discuss my personal experience of being around food, as well as the cooking process and the emotional attachment to animals. And for other peoples opinion I want to ask some of my friends and family their personal belief about if the way these animals are being treated is morally correct. I’m excited to get to work and see what I can do and what ideas I can come up with during the first week of this.
For some reason, the process of writing a draft this time around has felt a little harder, and the expectations seem a little higher. For the last project, it seemed as though we had more buildup and preparation. Even with the TS/IS techniques under my belt, I feel like I’m floundering a little, because this project requires me to think more abstractly than the last one. During our discussion last class about our next project, ideas for titles and connections would pop in my head and I would scramble to write them down on my Google doc so I wouldn’t forget them. I annotated what was said in the critique of my first essay onto a physical copy, so I could reference it during the writing process of the next project, because I don’t want to make the same simple mistakes I did the first time. I use the handouts to give me inspiration for bits to include in my paper. I’ve returned to each text to make connections between them. I’ve been looking for passages to relate or to put against one another. Samir quoting Leo Tolstoy’s “As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will always be battlefields” in reference to Jainism gave me inspiration for the current thesis of my paper, which is that farming and agriculture will always be a form of exploitation. I think the main approach I have to this project is to incorporate everything I’ve previously written on the subject. For example, I go back to my old journals to see if anything I’ve written in them can be woven into an argument or to be used as evidence. I cycle through writing this journal, reading through past journals, writing the Barclay paragraph, and then finally putting the ideas I’ve gathered into the first draft.
For my writing process on this new project, I am planning to redirect my attention to focus on my weaknesses that were shown in my previous essay. My favorite extra step I take when writing a paper is to write down bullet points of information I want to add. This helps me to not forget my points and keeps me focused on my points. This also helps me combine relating points so I can include them in the same body paragraph without getting disorganized. After this I like to organize my topics of each body paragraph and figure out what information I am going to add. My biggest struggle for each essay I have written is how to create a strong conclusion, so I am going to make that one of my main goals to focus on. I will listen to Jesse’s voice recording and take notes on what I can work on and refer back to them as a write so I can remind myself. From memory, he mentioned I need to keep a stronger focus on my point, include more context to my quotes and texts that are used throughout the essay, and to proofread over and over to avoid leaving in any silly grammatical errors. Peer review helps me a lot, especially when it’s with multiple peers, because I get a diverse answer of my strengths and weaknesses and allows me to go back and edit before I submit my final draft. I also plan to go back over the texts to read, annotate, and highlight them with another color, since I now have a different use for them. I usually like to start out by writing a skeleton of an essay and then I go back and fill in the paragraphs but I worry that when I do this process, I steer myself away from the main point so this time I will pay more attention to make sure everything I add is to support my claim. I am anxious but eager to write this essay because I normally do better with essays that are more sensible and personal.
My drafting process for the beginning of this project was like any other of my drafting processes. The first thing I did in order to get myself started was bringing out the Project 2 Handout from class. This allowed me to look over it again and grant myself a better understanding of the assignment, so that I am able to best respond to the prompt. As I read through the handout my focus was on the main prompt. Reading over this a few times before I begin typing allows me to think of multiple approaches for how I might want to answer. After reading the prompt a few times, I turn the page over to familiarize myself with the “ideas to consider”. Although these are not questions to be directly answered, reading these, and developing an understanding of how to answer them makes it so that I am able to bring in multiple ideas that I may not have considered prior. I also jot down some notes on the Project 2 handout during class, based on what Prof. Miller says, because whatever he says will surely get me a good grade on the paper. I look over my own notes before I begin typing, and I once I feel comfortable I decide to begin. The first thing I tend to do is set up the MLA format so I don’t forget. After that, a somewhat attention grabbing title is composed. Once I figure out the title I tend to look back at the handout frantically, acting like I don’t know where to start. Except, once I start typing the rest comes easily. For this process I did something a little different. I tend not to write out too much on the handout or else I begin to ramble and combine ideas that may not fit well together. So, for this project I jotted down three points which I wanted to focus on, and typed out whatever it was I felt during this writing session.
The piece “Consider the Lobster” by David Foster Wallace is a fascinating introspective piece all about how we treat lobsters in our society. It highlights how much we think about them, or if we choose to think about them as anything other than a meal. But possibly the most fascinating takeaway from the piece comes at the very end of it. In it, the author states that for “those Gourmet readers who enjoy well-prepared and -presented meals involving beef, veal, lamb, pork, chicken, lobster, etc.: How much do you think about the (possible) moral status and (probable) physical suffering of the animals involved? If so, what ethical convictions have you worked out that permit you not just to eat but to savor and enjoy flesh-based viands (since of course refined enjoyment, rather than just ingestion, is the whole point of gastronomy)? If, on the other hand, you’ll have no truck with confusions or convictions and regard stuff like the previous paragraph as just so much fatuous navel-gazing, what makes it feel OK, inside, to just dismiss the whole thing out of hand? That is, is your refusal to think about any of this the product of actual thought, or is it just that you don’t want to think about it? And if the latter, then why not? Do you ever think, even idly, about the possible reasons for your reluctance to think about it?” When first reading through the piece, I read these lines and did indeed ask these questions of myself. If I do consider myself a conscientious person, how could I allow myself to eat something that causes so much suffering? But the more saddening and pertinent point of it is that I ultimately forgot those questions. I went back to eating meat that, by existing, meant a grisly fate for the poor animal that was raised and died in conditions that caused so much suffering. As opposed to acting on the ideas set forth by the author, I preferred to put them out of mind and return to who I was before. It’s tragic but horribly easy to put out of mind the actual living thing behind the meat when it’s being eaten by one, when one is having a conversation about something completely different, when one’s concern in a place like the dining hall isn’t the unknown suffering of an animal, but where one is going to sit. That is truly a tragedy, and yet I don’t even consider it.
As I started project 2, I took some time to discuss my thinking process and ideas out loud. I re read the David Foster Wallace text and found myself stumbling upon some new ideas. I thought about them out loud and then wrote them down on the paper. Some of these ideas included Wallaces ideas but also my own reflection towards them along with his statement “There are limits to what even interested persons can ask of each other.” I tried to write down some interpretations of what I thought this meant and I found my own meaning for it. I think that this means there are limits to what we can ask of others, meaning we can do our best to stop animal abuse but it’s going to be nealy impossible to change the way humans are. When going through this process I found it helped to not make it perfect but to get my ideas across so I can end up expanding on them. Writing down notes and talking out loud definitely helped me think clearer to get my thoughts onto the page correctly. I ended up chatting with some peers after I started my draft, and we all sort of shared what we thought this quote by Wallace meant. We were all somewhat confused by it but I tried to explain to them what I thought it meant. As I continued revisiting the text I found some more ideas of Wallaces I wanted to make note of to connect to my own. I think my writing process works with summarizing each topic or each idea, so then I have some sort of outline to base it off of, and I can later go back to go deeper into each idea in the texts, and my own. I feel like I have some ideas that would make sense and connect together if I found a way to execute them on the paper correctly. I think If I made myself an outline it would help me to know what I am doing step by step and connecting one idea into another.
My writing process is a very hard process. I love writing but I struggle with coming up with ideas. It takes me a while to actually write words and get all my ideas together. I usually have all my notes written out on a sheet of paper then I try to combine them into an introductory paragraph.I jot down a lot of notes about how I want to write, what I want to write and how I can compile all the thoughts into a paper. I think I am going to execute the project by talking about how we can ask others about their beliefs. I am going to use David Foster Wallaces, “Consider the Lobster” as well as Charles C Mann’s, “Can the Earth Feed 10 Billion People”. I have talked with my peers about how they are thinking about executing this project and they mostly have similar ideas as me. I want to touch on how consideration falls into play with eating meat and animal abuse. I also would love to be able to touch on one of the points Professor Miller wrote down on our project 2 paper. I think this point is very important. “Just because you can eat/do something, should you?” I think that this is extremely important to think about, not just in this paper but in real life as well. I think that chatting with my peers really helped me understand the project a lot more. I think I will continue to write ideas for project two. To strengthen my writing process, I need to have all my ideas in front of me and I need help from my peers and others because I truly need to talk and plan out loud. I do think that project two has been extremely difficult to process. I feel like it could go in a lot of different directions.
When taking a look at the humanity around eating and indulging in the process of consuming an animal. Thoughts such as the pain and suffering and blood shed that had to happen for the meal I am looking at. When writing the first essay I was in the mindset of hunter, gatherer type of mindset that has changed to an industry that takes plenty more than anyone could possibly need and makes a profit off of the suffering. This is how my mindset had changed from writing essay 1 compared to essay 2. Another thought process that had changed in my mind was is it okay to even be asking some of these questions in the first place. Is it morally correct to ask another human if you care about the pain and suffering that went into your hot dog? Or do you care about the cows that are being murdered in slaughterhouses? Questions like these lead to rabbit holes of debates and what eventually comes down to a disagreement because the argument of “is it morally correct to kill an animal for gustatory pleasure humanly correct”. For example when I was reading david foster wallace’s essay consider the lobster, I had started to think about what my mom would think about what I am saying, me personally I am able to look through the pain and suffering of that animal but for my mother, it’s something that crosses her mind every time because she is so educated on this subject. Now that I am more exposed and experienced in this field my thought process has changed for the better from never considering the pain and suffering to thanking the animals and praising them for their gifts they have unwillingly offered to us for our pleasure. I believe everyone can and should think deeper about where food is really coming from and by doing this we can create a healthier, more sustainable environment.
I enjoy writing, it’s just a tad hard for me to make everything come together and make sense. If I were to approach this topic I would first jot down my ideas and make sure they are important and make sense for this project’s main idea. When talking to my peers about this upcoming project, we are all taking the same route when it comes to writing it all out. When writing this out, we have to take all the considerations for this project. We need to look at the articles and answer the questions it may ask us when writing. When the writing is done, we all tend to read our articles to one another. This tends to help us out more when finding mistakes, we are also able to find any sentences that could be repetitive. When working with others it tends to help me out a lot.
13 thoughts on “JOURNAL # 12”
I find myself writing small bits of project 2 as I get time to sit down and think harder about the project than the first one. I think that writing project 2 has been a lot more difficult so far because the complexity of the articles we are working with require a lot more thought. I have been trying to write in a more dense context to keep my word count to a manageable amount. Recently I have been reading a certain author and In the most simple way I find myself thinking about writing in a style to sort of mimic his style. Structurally I have been writing more for the big picture, originally writing in bigger blocks, now I’m trying to build my introduction and keep in mind that what is in my introduction will have to follow in my topic sentences in the meat of my essay. I have found that finding quotations to relate my main topics to has been easier in this draft process. I think that knowing the Barclay formula and keeping in mind the outline as you are pulling sentences out already knowing that I will be able to explain the quote and back it up with another source. This both streamlines the writing process, but takes more time to be able to get the write quotes out of these dense sources. I think that once I get my idea’s flowing and am able to connect both of the essays through multiple body paragraphs, I will be able to put everything together much more efficiently than paper 1. I find myself going back to the texts a lot more in pursuit of finding the differences and similarities to pick out and compare between the two authors. For the future I think I can see myself having to put more time into paper two simply because of the complexity of work, and the struggle to find the right words to fit how i actually think is always a process.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14JZW_sTNl-mKxRSXcXnB5ELIJCHf9F47ifPh6-RlUrw/edit
There is, and probably will forever be, an ongoing debate over people’s willingness to be considerate. There is no right or wrong to a person’s beliefs, and everyone has a limit to how considerate they are inclined to be. However, many struggle to see the reasons behind a person’s ethical standings towards some plants and animals. Everyone sees the environment and the animals differently. Some believe that they are something that needs to be protected at all costs, and others see them as objects with the only purpose of keeping humans alive. But there is a grey area in this discussion. A middle ground that sees plants and animals as both food and living things. Not every person needs to pick a side in the ethical battle of whether humans should consider the well-being of every animal they want to eat. David Foster Wallace brings up the point that people avoid thinking about the ethics behind eating animals, and it is true. When a person makes the decision to cook a lobster, most of the time they just throw it into the pot without thinking of the moral implications of doing so. This is because people have limitations of how considerate they are willing to be. These limitations vary between people. I am the first to admit that I am not a vegetarian. I enjoy having meat in my diet, but that does not mean that I support the slaughtering of all animals. I certainly could never be the one to kill them, and I know that there are many out there who feel the same way. People avoid thinking about the pain and suffering that some animals feel when they die, and many are considerate to an extent. A large number of people see many things as morally less important than human beings, and that is not just directed toward animals. The environment is one thing that a lot of people choose not to think about. There are people whose limits of being considerate end on the planet. It is seen as the home to all living things, but the health of our ecosystems is not always considered. Some are unwilling to consider the environment as something that needs to be protected. There are even people who draw their lines at other humans. Sometimes those who stand higher up in life choose not to be considerate of those who are not as well off. Every person has their own beliefs as to what is ethically right and wrong, and this plays a massive role in how much thought is put into some decisions. There are many factors that determine whether a person is willing to be considerate.
While beggining my first pieces of writing for project #2 this one especially has me excited. I feel like there’s a huge grey area when it comes to writing this and I can really get creative with this and respond how I’d like to. I plan on talking about my relationship with food, but on the other end how I feel about animals and about how they’re not always represented correctly in the food industry. The piece of text I plan on using is “What The Crows Know”, and talking about DFW’s text along with it. I want to use what it said in “What The Crows Know”, and discuss how smart animals are, and that they do understand the tortuting process that goes along with cooking them as food. I also want to discuss my personal experience of being around food, as well as the cooking process and the emotional attachment to animals. And for other peoples opinion I want to ask some of my friends and family their personal belief about if the way these animals are being treated is morally correct. I’m excited to get to work and see what I can do and what ideas I can come up with during the first week of this.
For some reason, the process of writing a draft this time around has felt a little harder, and the expectations seem a little higher. For the last project, it seemed as though we had more buildup and preparation. Even with the TS/IS techniques under my belt, I feel like I’m floundering a little, because this project requires me to think more abstractly than the last one. During our discussion last class about our next project, ideas for titles and connections would pop in my head and I would scramble to write them down on my Google doc so I wouldn’t forget them. I annotated what was said in the critique of my first essay onto a physical copy, so I could reference it during the writing process of the next project, because I don’t want to make the same simple mistakes I did the first time. I use the handouts to give me inspiration for bits to include in my paper. I’ve returned to each text to make connections between them. I’ve been looking for passages to relate or to put against one another. Samir quoting Leo Tolstoy’s “As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will always be battlefields” in reference to Jainism gave me inspiration for the current thesis of my paper, which is that farming and agriculture will always be a form of exploitation. I think the main approach I have to this project is to incorporate everything I’ve previously written on the subject. For example, I go back to my old journals to see if anything I’ve written in them can be woven into an argument or to be used as evidence. I cycle through writing this journal, reading through past journals, writing the Barclay paragraph, and then finally putting the ideas I’ve gathered into the first draft.
For my writing process on this new project, I am planning to redirect my attention to focus on my weaknesses that were shown in my previous essay. My favorite extra step I take when writing a paper is to write down bullet points of information I want to add. This helps me to not forget my points and keeps me focused on my points. This also helps me combine relating points so I can include them in the same body paragraph without getting disorganized. After this I like to organize my topics of each body paragraph and figure out what information I am going to add. My biggest struggle for each essay I have written is how to create a strong conclusion, so I am going to make that one of my main goals to focus on. I will listen to Jesse’s voice recording and take notes on what I can work on and refer back to them as a write so I can remind myself. From memory, he mentioned I need to keep a stronger focus on my point, include more context to my quotes and texts that are used throughout the essay, and to proofread over and over to avoid leaving in any silly grammatical errors. Peer review helps me a lot, especially when it’s with multiple peers, because I get a diverse answer of my strengths and weaknesses and allows me to go back and edit before I submit my final draft. I also plan to go back over the texts to read, annotate, and highlight them with another color, since I now have a different use for them. I usually like to start out by writing a skeleton of an essay and then I go back and fill in the paragraphs but I worry that when I do this process, I steer myself away from the main point so this time I will pay more attention to make sure everything I add is to support my claim. I am anxious but eager to write this essay because I normally do better with essays that are more sensible and personal.
My drafting process for the beginning of this project was like any other of my drafting processes. The first thing I did in order to get myself started was bringing out the Project 2 Handout from class. This allowed me to look over it again and grant myself a better understanding of the assignment, so that I am able to best respond to the prompt. As I read through the handout my focus was on the main prompt. Reading over this a few times before I begin typing allows me to think of multiple approaches for how I might want to answer. After reading the prompt a few times, I turn the page over to familiarize myself with the “ideas to consider”. Although these are not questions to be directly answered, reading these, and developing an understanding of how to answer them makes it so that I am able to bring in multiple ideas that I may not have considered prior. I also jot down some notes on the Project 2 handout during class, based on what Prof. Miller says, because whatever he says will surely get me a good grade on the paper. I look over my own notes before I begin typing, and I once I feel comfortable I decide to begin. The first thing I tend to do is set up the MLA format so I don’t forget. After that, a somewhat attention grabbing title is composed. Once I figure out the title I tend to look back at the handout frantically, acting like I don’t know where to start. Except, once I start typing the rest comes easily. For this process I did something a little different. I tend not to write out too much on the handout or else I begin to ramble and combine ideas that may not fit well together. So, for this project I jotted down three points which I wanted to focus on, and typed out whatever it was I felt during this writing session.
The piece “Consider the Lobster” by David Foster Wallace is a fascinating introspective piece all about how we treat lobsters in our society. It highlights how much we think about them, or if we choose to think about them as anything other than a meal. But possibly the most fascinating takeaway from the piece comes at the very end of it. In it, the author states that for “those Gourmet readers who enjoy well-prepared and -presented meals involving beef, veal, lamb, pork, chicken, lobster, etc.: How much do you think about the (possible) moral status and (probable) physical suffering of the animals involved? If so, what ethical convictions have you worked out that permit you not just to eat but to savor and enjoy flesh-based viands (since of course refined enjoyment, rather than just ingestion, is the whole point of gastronomy)? If, on the other hand, you’ll have no truck with confusions or convictions and regard stuff like the previous paragraph as just so much fatuous navel-gazing, what makes it feel OK, inside, to just dismiss the whole thing out of hand? That is, is your refusal to think about any of this the product of actual thought, or is it just that you don’t want to think about it? And if the latter, then why not? Do you ever think, even idly, about the possible reasons for your reluctance to think about it?” When first reading through the piece, I read these lines and did indeed ask these questions of myself. If I do consider myself a conscientious person, how could I allow myself to eat something that causes so much suffering? But the more saddening and pertinent point of it is that I ultimately forgot those questions. I went back to eating meat that, by existing, meant a grisly fate for the poor animal that was raised and died in conditions that caused so much suffering. As opposed to acting on the ideas set forth by the author, I preferred to put them out of mind and return to who I was before. It’s tragic but horribly easy to put out of mind the actual living thing behind the meat when it’s being eaten by one, when one is having a conversation about something completely different, when one’s concern in a place like the dining hall isn’t the unknown suffering of an animal, but where one is going to sit. That is truly a tragedy, and yet I don’t even consider it.
As I started project 2, I took some time to discuss my thinking process and ideas out loud. I re read the David Foster Wallace text and found myself stumbling upon some new ideas. I thought about them out loud and then wrote them down on the paper. Some of these ideas included Wallaces ideas but also my own reflection towards them along with his statement “There are limits to what even interested persons can ask of each other.” I tried to write down some interpretations of what I thought this meant and I found my own meaning for it. I think that this means there are limits to what we can ask of others, meaning we can do our best to stop animal abuse but it’s going to be nealy impossible to change the way humans are. When going through this process I found it helped to not make it perfect but to get my ideas across so I can end up expanding on them. Writing down notes and talking out loud definitely helped me think clearer to get my thoughts onto the page correctly. I ended up chatting with some peers after I started my draft, and we all sort of shared what we thought this quote by Wallace meant. We were all somewhat confused by it but I tried to explain to them what I thought it meant. As I continued revisiting the text I found some more ideas of Wallaces I wanted to make note of to connect to my own. I think my writing process works with summarizing each topic or each idea, so then I have some sort of outline to base it off of, and I can later go back to go deeper into each idea in the texts, and my own. I feel like I have some ideas that would make sense and connect together if I found a way to execute them on the paper correctly. I think If I made myself an outline it would help me to know what I am doing step by step and connecting one idea into another.
My writing process is a very hard process. I love writing but I struggle with coming up with ideas. It takes me a while to actually write words and get all my ideas together. I usually have all my notes written out on a sheet of paper then I try to combine them into an introductory paragraph.I jot down a lot of notes about how I want to write, what I want to write and how I can compile all the thoughts into a paper. I think I am going to execute the project by talking about how we can ask others about their beliefs. I am going to use David Foster Wallaces, “Consider the Lobster” as well as Charles C Mann’s, “Can the Earth Feed 10 Billion People”. I have talked with my peers about how they are thinking about executing this project and they mostly have similar ideas as me. I want to touch on how consideration falls into play with eating meat and animal abuse. I also would love to be able to touch on one of the points Professor Miller wrote down on our project 2 paper. I think this point is very important. “Just because you can eat/do something, should you?” I think that this is extremely important to think about, not just in this paper but in real life as well. I think that chatting with my peers really helped me understand the project a lot more. I think I will continue to write ideas for project two. To strengthen my writing process, I need to have all my ideas in front of me and I need help from my peers and others because I truly need to talk and plan out loud. I do think that project two has been extremely difficult to process. I feel like it could go in a lot of different directions.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Pmlor6yKJSVqBnEUmZScAWVV5Cf3PMxFFYjWqaGytPk/edit
When taking a look at the humanity around eating and indulging in the process of consuming an animal. Thoughts such as the pain and suffering and blood shed that had to happen for the meal I am looking at. When writing the first essay I was in the mindset of hunter, gatherer type of mindset that has changed to an industry that takes plenty more than anyone could possibly need and makes a profit off of the suffering. This is how my mindset had changed from writing essay 1 compared to essay 2. Another thought process that had changed in my mind was is it okay to even be asking some of these questions in the first place. Is it morally correct to ask another human if you care about the pain and suffering that went into your hot dog? Or do you care about the cows that are being murdered in slaughterhouses? Questions like these lead to rabbit holes of debates and what eventually comes down to a disagreement because the argument of “is it morally correct to kill an animal for gustatory pleasure humanly correct”. For example when I was reading david foster wallace’s essay consider the lobster, I had started to think about what my mom would think about what I am saying, me personally I am able to look through the pain and suffering of that animal but for my mother, it’s something that crosses her mind every time because she is so educated on this subject. Now that I am more exposed and experienced in this field my thought process has changed for the better from never considering the pain and suffering to thanking the animals and praising them for their gifts they have unwillingly offered to us for our pleasure. I believe everyone can and should think deeper about where food is really coming from and by doing this we can create a healthier, more sustainable environment.
I enjoy writing, it’s just a tad hard for me to make everything come together and make sense. If I were to approach this topic I would first jot down my ideas and make sure they are important and make sense for this project’s main idea. When talking to my peers about this upcoming project, we are all taking the same route when it comes to writing it all out. When writing this out, we have to take all the considerations for this project. We need to look at the articles and answer the questions it may ask us when writing. When the writing is done, we all tend to read our articles to one another. This tends to help us out more when finding mistakes, we are also able to find any sentences that could be repetitive. When working with others it tends to help me out a lot.