I need someone to reorgnize my ESSAY !

Testing on Animals

Saleh Al-Raeesi

Shersta Chabot

21 Oct 2014

Testing on animals refers to a carrying out experiments on animals in medical research and in Institutions of Higher Learning to advance prevention and cure of diseases as well as adding to the body of knowledge. Testing on animals’ text is highly controversial raising ethical issues behind the idea. There are various aspects of the text that attracted attention of audience such as the word choice of the text and social expectation.

In the text of testing on animals, the word diction proved to be an issue bringing forth heated debate on the text. For instance the use of the term vivisection leads to multiple interpretations. These interpretations included the torture, suffering and death. The term therefore precipitated negative connotation that testing on animals is all about harming the animals. It thus brought more harm than good hence should not be supported. Scientists brought up a new term to replace vivisection known as the animal experimentation, drawing philosophical view about animal conscience and pain posted by Rene Descartes’. This philosopher noted that, the term animal torture does not apply because, animals lack conscience hence they don’t feel pain. Scientists also argued that, animal experimentation does more good than harm as it leads to discovery medicine to save human life. The choice of words in this particular text is therefore the one that was controversial, use of the word/term vivisection that means to harm by torturing, bringing unnecessary pain and death.

People take various risks in their writing depending on the societal norms and their intuitive ideas. If the writing tries to portray a different idea that is different from societal norm, then it becomes risks being rejected by the audience. Testing on animals precipitated ideas that were different from the societal norm that upholds animal rights to be protected from unnecessary harm. To underscore the argument, United States Department for Agriculture (USDA) notes that, the animal testing procedures caused momentary pain and distress to the animals in question. In a similar vein, in United Kingdom (UK), the research projects that involved testing on animals were categorized as mild, moderate and substantial in terms of suffering they cause to animals. These notions are partly derived from societal norms that hold that, animals just like human beings have basic rights that require to be protected.

The level of risk varies whereby some writings are riskier than others. This is due various factors. These factors include the word diction of the text, the ideas it seeks to communicate to the audience and the type of audience. The combination of all the three factors would make a text riskier than a text with only one factor. For instance, in the text of animal testing, is compromised of three factors hence is very controversial. The wording is wrong as it leads to multiple interpretations. Idea is unpopular amongst the societies that have societal norms that hold that it is ethically wrong to torture animals, such as the United States and United Kingdom. The audience also contributes to how risky the text becomes. For instance the text on animals has two types of audiences, the audience that seeks to ensure animal rights are protected, and the audience that ensures that medical research is advanced. The audience of test on animals thus has therefore fought a tag of war with different arguments.

The parts of the writing process/experience that are affected by risk include the idea, topic/subject and word choice. The final layout or design has little to do with text. When the idea goes against the popular ideology poses a risk to the writer on how he is going to convince his/her audience to accept and appreciate his/her ideas. For instance, the text on test on animals’ idea was against the societal norm whereby, animals are believed to have inherent writes thus administering tests on them is unethical. In this regard, the writer who was the brainchild of the ideas faced the risk of his/her ideas being rejected and even personal attack on the extreme. Another very risky part of the text is the wording whereby, it is subject to multiple interpretations such as usage of the word vivisection, which was taken to have negative connotation, making the whole text to look negative, eluding the many benefits the idea brings to human life. The topic/subject also poses the risk to the writer as it is the one captures audience attention at a first sight. The writer therefore must critically choose the topic so that it attracts audience attention leading to appreciation at a glance. For instance, the scientists’ decided to revise the topic; animal vivisection or animal dissection to animal experimentation, in order to mitigate negative connotation at a glance.

There are ways in which writers are able to manage these risks, and enabling them succeed in their work. A writer will be able to manage afore identified risks through critically analyzing each one of them and finding ways to share his/her ideas with the audience while minimizing their effects. For instance, a writer may justify his/her ideas based on the societal norms. This will help in reducing the criticisms of the idea on the ethical basis. Similarly, a writer may be able manage the risks arising from wording by using better terms that refer to the same thing. For instance, in the text on testing on animals, the term animal experimentation is a better term that adopted by the scientists’ in place for vivisection or animal dissection. Another way in which a writer can be able to manage risks in writing is through proper selection of the topic while passing the similar notion. The topic should be as positive as possible in order to attract readers/ audience attention at a first sight. For instance, the topic on animal experimentation is better than the topic on animal dissection.

Writers are able to make their risky choices and creativity work against all odds by being assertive in the notion they want to disseminate to the audience. For instance, Charles Darwin, a great philosopher of Britain when was asked about his opinion on animal vivisection noted that, the whole idea was good, but should only be done for investigations on physiology and not damnable and detestable curiosity. The statement was supporting animal experimentation but was with full of positivity. To this end, though the ideas brought heated debate, creative minds were able make their idea acceptable to the audience though with few modifications.

There are of course in which a risk-taking writer is able to work with traditional norms and expectations of writing. A risk-taking writer should first and foremost understand full well on the traditional norms and expectation. He/she should synchronize his ideas in writing with the norms and expectations of the society to enable him/her win the audience of the people he/she targets. For instance, the notion of test on animals cuts across the societies where traditional norms say that animals have inherent rights, which should be protected. To this end, a writer with ideas that will lead to violation of animals’ rights must be very creative to convince the society that, the move is a last resort and it is for the ultimate good of mankind. Charles Darwin used this tool when was asked about his opinion regarding animal vivisection. He observed that, vivisection is not a hobby where people want to satisfy their curiosity, but a necessary evil that is inevitable in real investigations on physiology.

There are no situations where taking risks is not allowed. Taking a risk is an individual choice of the risk taker. However, risks can be minimized through utilization of proper instruments and channels in order to win. For instance, the brainchild of testing on animals was able to win by being creative and remaining focused despite criticisms. Today, the world celebrates advanced physiological knowledge, skills and experience due to testing on animals.

The discussion reveals that people take various risks in their writing depending on the societal norms and their intuitive ideas. If the writing tries to portray a different idea that is different from societal norm, then it becomes risks being rejected by the audience. Testing on animals precipitated ideas that were different from the societal norm that upholds animal rights to be protected from unnecessary harm. The discussion also proposes that a risk-taking writer should first and foremost understand full well on the traditional norms and expectation. He/she should synchronize his ideas in writing with the norms and expectations of the society to enable him/her win the audience of the people he/she targets. For instance, the notion of test on animals cuts across the societies where traditional norms say that animals have inherent rights, which should be protected. To this end, a writer with ideas that will lead to violation of animals’ rights must be very creative to convince the society that, the move is a last resort and it is for the ultimate good of mankind.

References

DeGrazia et al (1991). "Pain, suffering, and anxiety in animals and humans". Theoretical Medicine 12 (3): 193–211. doi : 10.1007/BF00489606 . PMID   1754965 .

Yarri, D (2005). The Ethics of Animal Experimentation, Oxford University Press U.S., ISBN 0195181794 .