In the Case of the Animals vs. Man, the animals’ arguments are far more logical and less flawed compared to the humans’ arguments. Ultimately, the animal’s reasonings stood out to be more compelling and rational. Although both sides clearly had flaws in their rebuttals, the animals were able to contradict almost every argument the humans had. Therefore, it allowed for the animals’ to convince the King that the humans are not their masters. Unfortunately, the humans never established a rebuttal that would negate any of the animals’ reasonings. Majority of the humans’ argument, degraded animals and would praise the human’s lifestyle. Furthermore, the humans never had a strong argument that would convince the King, or readers, why they deserve to be masters of all animals. Unlike the humans, the animals’ arguments are always tied back to their main reasoning that God did not favor any one of his creations.
One of the humans arguments used in the case was, “Our fair form, erect stature, upright carriage, and keen senses, our subtle powers of discrimination, our sharp minds and superior intellects all show that we are the masters and they, our slaves” (46). In this argument, the humans dispute that due to their physical form and appearance they should hold ownership of the animals. The animals quickly debunk this plea and explain that every part of their body served a purpose for them intended by God. Much of the humans’ case was trying to validate how poorly they treated the animals. Although the animals’ arguments do contain flaws, many of their reasonings stood out to be more persuasive than the humans’ arguments. For example, when the frog, the spokesman of the water animals, explained that smaller animals are able to consume larger animals and vice versa. This established equity between them because at the end of the human lifetime they can be consumed by that smallest creature. “They can be eaters or eaten. So what do the Adamites have to boast of over us and all other animals? Their fate is like ours” (228). It enhanced the animals main reasoning that not one species or creature is more powerful than the other. Every creature on earth created by God, is dependent on other animals and each is equally important.
Angeles Hernandez
Environmental Justice in Beast Fables 
Hi Angeles. I really liked your take on the animals steady reasons to be free, tying all back to God not creating any animals to be above the rest. How each had their own role in life and gave no creature the power and permission to enslave the other. Also, all the humans reasons for enslavement were based on their own egotistical accomplishments, not seeing themselves as part of the wider circle of life, was very interesting. Humans proved unable to support their weak claims and were shot down by the very source they used in the beginning of the debate. I would have liked if you included some quotes about the humans gloating over their own superior lifestyle as reasons for their superiority. It would have shown how they base their arguments on flimsy statements without looking at the broader context of how this lifestyle came to be, which depended heavily on animal products and the toil of many humans.
-Arlette Zerafin
Hey Angeles,
I really like how you point out that humans never really had a rebuttal against the points that animals made. I think you include some more quotes from the text to support your statement when you mention “the animals debunk this plea”. Show how animals debunked the humans’ pleas. Adding more evidence will make your stance and reasoning stronger. Nice job!
~Fiza Haroon