For my first example blog post, I chose a TED Lecture by Graham Hill called "Why I'm a Weekday Vegetarian." To give a bit of background, TED is a non-profit organization that's dedicated to bringing together the best minds in the country to give short talks on important subjects such as education, the environment, war and foreign policy, technology, etc, etc. In this video, Graham Hill, creator of treehugger.com - a website to promote all things sustainable - gives a short, four minute talk on the topic of meat consumption and vegetarianism.
One of the effective strategies I noticed in Hill's talk is the use of rhetorical questions; that is, questions directed at the audience to bring them into the conversation and relate to their experience. Toward the beginning of the video, he confesses that, even given all he knows about the harmful impact of meat eating, he has had trouble taking the plunge and becoming a vegetarian. He asks the audience, "why was I stalling?". This question allows the audience to consider the reasons that they themselves may or may not be stalling when it comes to the question of vegetarianism. Later, he talks about vowing that each meal of meat would be his last, but continuing to eat it regardless and asks, "sound familiar?". Again, with this question, he tries to help the audience relate to his experience. Maybe they've felt like this before.
Another effective strategy is the symmetry of his talk. Two times at the beginning, he lists the drawbacks of meat consumption to our health, the animals, and greenhouse gas emissions. Then, once he poses his solution of weekday vegetarianism, he lists the benefits of this choice a couple of times as well ("health, pocketbook, environment, animals"). This technique of listing and recapitulating his reasons for going weekday veg, as he says, works very effectively to help the audience remember all of the benefits to be gained from reducing meat consumption.
I also enjoy the humor in his talk, for example, when he says "Imagine your last hamburger." Another quotable line that seemed significant was his final statement that, "if all of us ate half as much meat, it would be like half of us are vegetarians." His position makes a lot of sense to me because it does seem like vegetarianism and meat eating are presented to society as extreme, opposing choices, while in reality, we could all do a lot more good by simply picking a more mindful place in the middle.
Questions for discussion:
1) Which parts of the talk did you connect with most? Did the talk relate at all to your personal experiences?
2) Which parts of the talk seemed most convincing to you? What kind of evidence does Hill use to support his points and does it seem valid to you?
3) What are your impressions of vegetarianism - does it seem like a radical position? Does this more middle of the road option seem appealing?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI found the part about how much emissions and water meat production uses. Since both of those are growing problems, eating less meat could help. I also found his idea of a weekday vegetarian to be contradictory. It seems that would be a slap in the face to “real” vegetarians. You can’t call yourself a vegetarian if you eat meat.
ReplyDeleteI found this post to be interesting because rarely do I take the time to think about vegetarians or how much meat I am eating. I respect vegetarians beliefs, but I do not like the last paragraph in this post. How can a person be half a vegetarian? To me, your the one extreme or the othere. You like eat and like meat or you don't.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting how in just a short list of the benefits of eating less meat, Hill is potentially swaying an incredibly large and diverse group of people. People who are short on money, who want to lose weight, who want to live longer, who want to protect the environment, and who are against animal cruelty may all be inspired by Hill to become weekday vegetarians. It was also impressive how Hill brought vegetarianism into his audience's scope, no matter what their background, by saying that everyone eating half as much meat is the same as half of all people being vegetarian. This statement made vegetarianism much less of a radical position.
ReplyDeleteAs I've always seen or heard about it, vegetarianism is a radical position. It takes an extreme change of lifestyle that many people aren't willing to take because not many of us grew up being vegetarians from the start. However, this middle ground approach that Hill offers allows anybody to be in part "vegetarian". Even if everybody was to just cut meat from their diets for one or two days out of the week meat consumption for the world would drop by almost 15-30%. If everybody is willing to do a little work to help improve the environment and animal conditions throughout the world, then alot more can change compared to very few people doing 100% of the work.
ReplyDeleteThough personally Graham Hill did not really influence my eating habits, I think his short talk could easily sway many people that were in his same position of stalling vegetarianism. He listed all the benefits of weight loss, preventing animal cruelty, saving the environment, and living longer. At the same time, his suggestion still allows people to eat meat occasionally which is appealing because they don't have to completely cut it out of their lives. I think Hill's solution of being a "weekday vegetarian" is less radical and much easier for people to commit to.
ReplyDeleteFrom my viewpoint, I definitely feel like vegetarianism is a very radical position. I honestly could not imagine never eating a juicy cheeseburger for the rest of my life, or going without grilled chicken or turkey. I think that taking the middle road is a great idea to help the environment, save money, and improve health, but even if one person may cut out meat on the weekdays, that does not really change how much meat is processed. The only way to make it more environmentally friendly would be to have a huge amount of people cut out meat from their day-to-day routines, and I feel that this possibility is a stretch.
ReplyDeleteI understood where he was coming from when he talked about how he couldn't give up meat completely. There are all sorts of good reasons to be vegetarian but it's just too radical of a stance for me. I could never give up meat, not just because I think it tastes great, but it's really not that difficult to grill up a burger or throw some chicken in the oven, so it's a convenience thing as well. Some of the facts he presented made a good argument for vegetarianism; like eating one hamburger a day can increase death risk by a third, 10 billion animals are killed a year for our enjoyment, and meat causes more emissions than all of transportation combined. Hill makes some good points and some of his ideas are pretty encouraging. I think for many people, myself included, becoming a full-fledged vegan will never happen. However, like Hill said, there are many ways to cut back on meat, and I think that's a great idea. Doing simple things like eating less red meat and more fish, and limiting the amount of meat we consume each week, are small yet simple steps that can improve anyone's health. So while vegetarianism isn't in my future, improving what I eat is; and I think if everyone did this just a little we could all become healthier and also help our planet in the process.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ryan. I too did not like the part where he said about being a "half vegetarian." You either eat meat (not being a vegetarian) or you give it up entirely (a vegetarian). I sometimes don't eat meat either (not on specific days though), yet I don't consider myself a "half vegetarian.' You're either a vegetarian or not. It did not sway my eating habits but nevertheless it was quite informative and interesting!
ReplyDeleteThe most convincing part of Hill's speech was when he was naming off all the positive effects of becoming a weekend vegetarian had on him. He lost weight, saved money, prevented animal cruelty, helped the environment, and became healthier. All of these things are something that I support but this is not enough to change me to a vegetarian. This might change somebody who is on the fence about becoming a vegetarian and was a really good informative speech.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the middle of the road option that Hill presents is an interesting concept. Being completely vegetarian, in my opinion, is quite radical. There are necessary nutrients in meat that are difficult, although not impossible, to obtain through other means, and trying to find those other means is just a hassle. However, being "part vegetarian" is something to think about. Giving up meat completely is a big commitment, however just giving it up on the weekdays is an interesting alternative. You can still get some of those nutrients, but at the same time you wouldn't be overeating it, helping reduce that risk caused from eating it every day.
ReplyDeleteI thought this post was extremely interesting, but it didn't influence me to change my eating habits in any way. Some of my friends are vegetarians and I can't help but always question them because it seems like such a extreme and radical idea. Of course, eliminating meat out of every single person's life would benefit so many things but that is unlikely. Like everyone else, I found the idea of "half vegetarian" to be somewhat contradictory. Either you eat no meat at all, or you do and that's life. Although, the idea is appealing and would be much a much easier concept for people to commit to. I found Hill to be very personable and easy to understand, having a middle-man stance on the idea of vegetarianism.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I do not think there is anything wrong with eating meat. The reason why America is facing obesity problems is not because we eat meat, but because we are unable to balance our meals and take in a reasonable portion of meat. Meat has its benefits but like anything in the world, too much of it is bad for you. The reason why I am against being a vegetarian is because our body is compatible with meat; we are omnivores and our digestive systems are able to digest meat and get important nutrients like fats and proteins from it. Fats and proteins are important nutrients and we cannot survive without it. It's just that too much of it is bad. It's all about balance.
ReplyDeleteI thought that it was an interesting idea of being 'half a vegetarian'. I never thought that it could be a possibility. I always thought it was either being a vegetarian or a meat eater. At the beginning of the video, I was skeptical that anything he would say could convince me to try being more vegetarian. My viewpoint started to change, however, when he was talking about how it made him a healthier and better person.
ReplyDeleteI pretty much agree with Tony. Vegetarianism is a radical position in my opinion. I believe if you can digest in reasonable quantities and get some nutrients out of it, it should be ate. Being half a vegetarian wouldn't be so bad because it would be the same as living a healthier lifestyle. I like his idea actually because it would have positive environmental and health impacts without missing too much at all.
ReplyDeleteI think Graham Hill did a good job of getting his point across. Being vegetarian or not doesn't have to be so black and white. If you just cut down on your meat intake you'd be better off. It doesn't have to be a lot at one time, but slowly cutting it down would be easier. Mr. Hill was very good at using humor to help his point even though that was a tough crowd. He seems like a guy you would want to grill some burgers with on a weekday....wait.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the way Hill pointed out how people might not become vegetarians simply because of how difficult it is to start to be most powerful in this lecture. The concept of one last hamburger might be too much for some. With Hill’s approach, you are able to embrace a mostly vegetarian lifestyle while still indulging in meat occasionally. He is able to make vegetarianism seem easier or more mainstream. By acknowledging that it is difficult to start being a vegetarian, Hill is able to connect with his audience; this makes him more likely to be taken seriously by viewers.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Tony on this. I believe that there isn't a problem with people consuming meat, rather the balancing of all food groups. However, I think it is interesting that it emphasizes cutting our meat consumption in half. By cutting it in half, or even just cutting down on it, one wouldn't have to classify themselves as a vegetarian, but as someone who just maintains a well-balanced, healthy diet. I think this article did a great job at getting its point across and that a lot of people can benefit from reading it.
ReplyDeleteI have not found this very interesting mostly due to the fact that I have never once considered becoming a vegetarian. I know there are some benefits to abstaining from meat, but I feel that not eating it at all is going overboard. People should be able to eat a balanced diet, but becoming vegetarians won't help out the environment unless it is done on a large enough scale. Which doesn't seem possible for a lot of people.
ReplyDeleteI think that it's worth a try since eating less red meat is good for earth and our health. There's no proves saying that being a vegetarian is absolutely good, but a weekday vegetarian can be one type of balanced diets. Meat has been food to people for thousands of years, it must have its own reason to sustain this relation between human and animals. In addition, some nutrition in meat is special and can't be substituted by vegetables, thus meat still plays necessary role in the diet. A radical vegetarian doesn't help to build a balance environment.
ReplyDelete