See The Requirement 51

By
Responsive Centered Red Button

Need Help with this Question or something similar to this? We got you! Just fill out the order form (follow the link below), and your paper will be assigned to an expert to help you ASAP.

Order Form

Question Description

Part A：

After the presenters have posted their statements pro and con and their rebuttals to each other for Debate 9.2 , classmates are required to write a paragraph response . First, before reading the debate, note if you are for or against the statement (before reading the debate, do you agree more with the pro or con position?). Then note if your position changed or remained the same after you read the debate (after reading the debate, do you agree more with the pro or con position?) Give any insights on the debate or debate topic.

Using the efficiencies of nature is as productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of industry (214, 222).

Con

I don’t think that using the efficiencies of nature is as productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of industry. The efficiency of nature is not productive. Grass which is from nature, but it is more like land than an object for us. It is the background in the landscape, used to set off other more distinct entities, such as trees, animals and buildings. The grass is more like the background for us, we like grass because of its smallness. By observing cattle grazing on the farm, the author found that: Although humans are omnivores, they can’t digest grass fiber, so they don’t like delicious food in the eyes of cows. Pollan expresses the difference between species by discovering the different ways humans treat grasslands.

Pram wondered whether organic food must be “better.” He believes that while not in all cases (for example, if organic produce is frozen and transported for miles, it will definitely have a negative impact on its taste), in general, organic produce does taste better. He also believes the food may be healthier because it does not contain pesticides, artificial growth hormones or chemical fertilizers. Research on whether organic food is more nutritious is mixed. Organic foods do seem to contain more polyphenols, compounds that plants use to fight diseases and insect pests. These polyphenols are good for human health, while industrial products contain fewer because they don’t have to struggle for survival. There is no doubt that organic agriculture is good for the environment, public health and farmers.

Bolen acknowledged that reducing human intervention in nature could be a good thing. Food grown without pesticides and fertilizers is almost always healthier for the environment and human diet. Organic food seems to provide more natural compounds to help plants resist diseases. These compounds are not produced in transgenic plants. After scientific design, transgenic plants will not be infected with diseases. In this case, it may actually be healthier for humans to allow plants to fight diseases themselves.

The main work here is done by animals: “I just direct and let each role play its part at the right time and place.” But on this farm, the relationship between the cow and the chicken (regardless of the other animals on the farm) is circular and non-linear, so it is difficult to know where the starting point is, or how to distinguish cause from effect, and where to draw the line. Agriculture cannot be suitable for large-scale operations because it involves the life, growth and death of plants and animals. In nature, health is the default. Most of the time, pests and diseases are just nature’s way of telling farmers what’s wrong. One of the most valuable things on a farm is the ecstasy of living things.

In summary, the knowledge and technology application in the industry make the production has system, guideline and friendly for the environment. Besides, as Pollan talked in the chapter 10 and 11, with the support of each field and scientific management, we can achieve Sustainable development and have a long term development.

Work cited:

Shu, W. S., & Lee, S. (2003). Beyond productivity—productivity and the three types of efficiencies of information technology industries. Information & Software Technology, 45(8), 513-524.

Tisdell, C. A. (2010). Conceptual issues in the measurement of economic and productive efficiencies. South African Journal of Economics, 53(1), 38-45.

Yeager, P. C. (1992). The politics of efficiencies, the efficiencies of politics: states vs. markets in environmental protection. Critical Review, 6(2-3), 231-253.

reply from pro:

Using the efficiency of nature is productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of the industry (214, 222)

rebuttal and question

Using the efficiency of nature is productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of the industry. Generally, as compared to the industrial products, natural products from the environment are healthy and rich in natural nutrients which are also suitable for the sustainability of healthy lives of animals. Consequently, the use of products of nature such as grass enhances the circulation of nutrients in the environment unlike the use artificial or industrially manufactured products to enhance the balance of productivity in the environment. According to Robinson, dependency on the industrial efficiency is likely to lead to environmental depletion of resources given the high population therefore natural vegetation such as the green forests would be destroyed as a result in the increase in demand for energy to facilitate industrial manufacture. Consequently, the dependency on efficiency of nature would also limit the amount of non-biodegradable wastes that are emitted to the natural environment by man
There is no complication in the relationship of animals in ecological cycle because the mode of survival in the ecological cycle is all about dependency hence the dependency on vegetation as well is inevitable. Even though there are mixed reactions regarding the benefits of organic foods, the benefits of organic foods are still uncountable and outdo the disadvantages as well as the merits of utilizing industrial products.
Question
What are the measures put in place by the government to enhance the utilization of organic foods?

Work Cited
Robinson, Lawrence. “Organic Foods: What You Need To Know – Helpguide.Org”. Helpguide.Org, 2019, https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm.

Pro post:

Using the efficiency of nature is productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of the industry (214, 222)
Pro
The use of efficiencies of nature such as organic foods reduces pollution, enhances the conservation of the environmental water cycle, the reduction of soil erosion, and also increased fertility. Consequently, Connie et al. posits that the use of efficiencies of nature over industrial efficiencies enhances the health of the humans because the use of pesticides in farming for instance results into chemical “body burden” which is risky for the health of humans especially and also jeopardizes the health of natural vegetation as well as the nutrient content. Some of the commonly scientific recorded effects of the efficiency of the industry include the increase in the risk of certain diseases such as cancer. Children also when exposed to the industrial efficiencies may experiences development challenges but the natural efficiencies are effective for the body and mind development of children because they are less toxic. Therefore, the use of efficiency of nature is productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of the industry.
The use of efficiencies of nature remains outstanding in comparison to the use of industrial efficiency because the main objective that every person yearns to achieve a sustainable life. Therefore, the use of natural efficiency cannot be disputed regardless of the dependency of humans on animals because the use of organic foods positively impacts all the members of the ecological cycle from the vegetation, to the animals and the humans.

Work Cited
Connie M Weaver, Johanna Dwyer, Victor L Fulgoni, Janet C King, Gilbert A Leveille, Ruth S MacDonald, Jose Ordovas, David Schnakenberg, Processed foods: contributions to nutrition, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Volume 99, Issue 6, June 2014, Pages 1525–1542, https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.114.089284

Con’s reply:

Rebuttal:

Hi, Haocen, thanks for your argument. In the topic sentence, “Using the efficiency of nature is productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of the industry”, there are two points. On the one hand, using the efficiency of nature is productive, compared with the usual efficiencies of industry. On the other hand, using the efficiency of nature is better for the environment, compared with the usual efficiencies of industry. However, in your argument, you just mentioned the latter one. “The use of efficiencies of nature such as organic foods reduce pollution, enhances the conservation of the environmental water cycle, the reduction of soil erosion, and also increased fertility.” I am not favor of this argument with you because the use of efficiencies of nature does not mean the reduce pollution, the reduction of soil erosion or the conservation of the environmental water. If there are no usual efficiencies of industry, there must be more water and soil wasted in the crop production. And without the use of pesticides in farming, the production of crops will be reduced and feed less people. Therefore, I don’t think that using the efficiencies of nature is as productive and better for the environment than the usual efficiencies of industry.

Discussion question:

In which aspects the usual efficiencies of the industry are more productive and better for the environment than the efficiency of nature?

Part B

Discussion 10.1: Week 10: The Omnivore’s Dilemma (304-363, 391-411 (end))

Answer ONE of the following questions that has not been answered by a previous poster, unless they have all been answered once already. It should help you to do the reading assigned before answering these questions. Also post a paragraph response to one of the other postings by your classmates. Make clear which comment you are responding to. You may agree, disagree, ask a question, or try to come up with a transition connecting two of the ideas in different postings. Please post by Thurs. 10/31 at midnight.

Choice 1: Life on the farm seems to be a lot of work. Why do you

think Salatin regards it as an ecstasy? Do you think such alternative kinds of farms are a viable alternative for our industrial food chain? What are the hidden costs of the way we do things?

How is the meal Pollan cooked from grass-fed, Polyface Farm, better

than the one from Whole Foods or McDonalds?

Choice 2: What is the problem with our relationship to food today? Consider the following quote from Chapter 16 “The Omnivore’s Dilemma,” describing what video cameras installed by anthropologists for General Mills observed about many Americans’ dinner routine:

Mom, perhaps feeling sentimental about the dinners of her childhood, still prepares a dish and a salad that she usually winds up eating by herself. Meanwhile, the kids, and Dad, too, if he’s around, each fix something different for themselves, because Dad’s on a low-carb diet, the teenager’s become a vegetarian, and the eight-year-old is on a strict ration of pizza that the shrink says it’s best to indulge. (302)

How does eating at your home compare to the families’ (above) that were studied by General Mills’ hired anthropologists? What is the signfiicance of such changes to traditional food culture, rules and rituals?

Choice 3: What do you think of some of the different deliberations Pollan makes about the ethics of eating animals? Pollan considers and responds to ethicist Peter Singer’s reflections on the ethical treatment of animals:

It’s one thing to choose between the chimp and the retarded child, or to accept the sacrifice of all those pigs surgeons practiced on to develop heart bypass surgery. But what happens when the choice is, as Singer writes, between “a lifetime of suffering for a nonhuman animal and the gastronomic preferences of a human being?” (312).

If we consider that animals should have some rights, shouldn’t these be taken into account? What kind of appeals does Pollan make in this passage? Does he appeal to ethos, pathos, and or logos, and how?

Choice 4: Pollan feels there is something alienating about being a vegetarian:

I also feel alienated from traditions I value: cultural traditions like the Thanksgiving turkey, or even franks at the ballpark, and family traditions like my mother’s beef brisket at Passover. These ritual meals link us to our history along multiple lines—family, religious, landscape, nation, and, if you want to go back much further, biology. (314)

How does food tie us to our culture? Does this seem like a valid argument for continuing to eat meat?

Choice 5: Pollan states,

Sometimes I think that all it would take to clarify our feelings about eating meat, and in the process begin to redeem animal agriculture, would be to simply pass a law requiring all the sheet-metal walls of all the CAFOs, and even the concrete walls of the slaughterhouses, to be replaced with glass. (332)

How do you think this would change our view of meat consumption or where we want to buy our meat?

Choice 6: Do you agree with Pollan that the animals at Polyface farm, eating worms and rooting for corn cobs, are happy? (319) What do you think constitutes animal happiness?

Choice 7: What is your opinion of the controversy about eliminating the invasive pigs from Santa Cruz Island? Should animal rights, like human rights, be thought of in terms of the individual, or more in terms of the ecosystem? (325)

Choice 8: What is shown by the picture of Angelo cleaning the pig on page. 362: “There was one picture. . .. of what is” (362).

What kind of appeals does Pollan make in this passage? Does he appeal to ethos, pathos, and or logos, and how?

Choice 9: Upon shooting the pig, Pollan feels pride and gratitude that the animal was a gift (353). But later in seeing a picture of himself after killing the pig, Pollan is embarrassed by his madly proud grin (360):“So which view of me the hunter is the right one, the shame at the photograph or the joy of the man in it, the outside gaze or the inside one?” (361). What do you think of this dissonance between the inside and outside view of the hunter, and what do you think this shows?

What kind of audience does Pollan aim at? From these passages in particular, what audience does he seem to be considering? What beliefs and knowledge does he assume they have?

peer’s post:

( I will send you later,)

How to create Testimonial Carousel using Bootstrap5

Clients' Reviews about Our Services