Reply to comment

 (Reposting under my name)

(I thought be did a really good job discussing this in class the other day but for the sake of assignments, here you go...) Call me gullible but I totally buy into most of his arguments for a few reasons. As someone previously mentioned, he uses some credible sources that particularly highlight his arguments. The sections that talked about Peter Singer and his book, "The Animal Liberation" come directly from Singer’s book and truly consider a bunch of his points. I think using such sources helps me to trust Pollan more because they are based on other credible things. Also, he seems to consider both sides which makes me think he is a more neutral source of information. In addition, I am inclined to trust him because the information he is divulging seems very realistic. I’ve heard of these issues in other arenas and can compare my knowledge to what he is saying.

Now, lets consider why I don't trust him. He puts a lot of things in fact statements that I don't necessarily agree with. For instance, on page 310, he says, "Murder and Rape are natural". First of all, I don' think this is a cut and dry issue. But besides that particular point, he makes a lot of his points in this matter-of-fact way that are too forceful. It makes me trust him less because his arguments sound more like opinions.

As a whole, I cannot say one-way if I trust him or not but I appreciate his tone of speech and find the information he is giving out interesting. Regardless, I am inclined to read more.