Poulsen Week 6

In Eating Animals there appears to be a number of logical fallacies that I was not aware of until I read about them in Thank You for Arguing.  This may be a stretch but I think that Safran Foer is adding a red herring to his book by talking about the influenza.  I think that by talking about influenza he is distracting from the fact that the food we eat is generated from mistreated animals.  Although the influenza section goes along with the mistreatment of the animals it is a different topic and makes readers think that what is going on is way worse than it actually may be. By making the connection of influenza and animal farms Safran Foer makes strengthens his case of needing to treat animals better but at the same time abandons his case of not eating animals.  People feel bad for the animals in this section because they are scared that by treating them poorly we are going to eventually face a plague like illness that could be the end of humanity when in reality the likely hood of this is very slim to non.  Safran Foer is trying to call on the readers fear or death and possible plague instead of the previous emotional pity or feeling bad for eating animals that are treated so poorly and forced to live in such awful conditions.  Like I said in the beginning this could be a stretch but because it is slightly a different approach to drawing on the readers emotions I thought that this could be a red herring.