The Supreme Court Series: The Case of Animal vs. Man

The Supreme Case of Animal vs Man

• Jose Lopez

The creative writing project my partner, Camilia, and I decided to produce was an imitation of a local newspaper from out hometown Los Angeles, The LA Times. This newspaper serves the basis for a medium that reaches out to a modern-day audience that typically gathers all of its political opinions and stories from news articles. By doing an imitation of The Case of the Animal versus Man Before the King of Jinn in the LA times, our audience will be able to comprehend the political aspects of this fable.  The book is a bit confusing and our intention for this project is to allow our audience to follow a more political yet understandable story of the first chapter of the book. However, it is true that not many people follow politics because it is either confusing or boring. But our intentions with this article is to provide a crucial point on fables and how politics can be very interesting and controversial. My partner and I are not only from LA, but we are both also political science major which allows us to put our passions into this project to convey our perspectives and passions to an audience. The story in the book was mimicked into a modern-day courtroom where the judge represents the Jinn, the defendant represents the humans, and the plaintiff represents the animals. There are differences between our interpretations of these stories and the ones intended such as this project being less religious but more political while the book is more religious and less political. My personal contribution to this project was doing half of the writings provided in the news article. I was in charge of placing who represents who such as the plaintiff represents the animals and the humans being the defendants in this case. I did my best to write the stories as simple in politics as possible.

ps. Click link named “The Supreme of Animal vs Man” above my name to witness our project. Thank you.

The Case of Baloney Vs. Baloney

By Jose Lopez

A persuasive speech has the ability to inspire, persuade, and establish a message by using words to make the audience comprehend the point of view the speaker is trying to invoke. In “The Case of the Animals versus Man Before the King of the Jinn” there have been instances where arguments through persuasion have been flawed for both sides of the argument. The story is about an argument occurring between humans and animals that has been taken to the King of Jinn. Humans have been accused by the animals for being abusive and insulting by making irrational points that animals were deserved to be treated as less than humans. Furthermore, animals themselves have been contradicting each other throughout the arguments.

The first argument that is formed from the humans is that they stand up straight and animals bend over to the floor because God intended the humans to rule over the animals. However, the animals contradicted this belief and stated, “He knew and wisely ordained that their form is best for them and ours for us.” (109). The argument continued and the animals have mentioned that the sole purpose for humans being taller than animals was simply that God made the food intended for humans in a tree where on the contrary the meals for the animals were on the ground. This argument made me think of Darwin’s theory of evolution and biodiversity in the sense that every kind of animal is different in some way depending on what they eat, where they live, and how they nurture. I believe this argument to be flawed because the humans nor the animals have seen God in person to know why he created things the way they are. The argument of evolution could have been mentioned in this debate in order to provide concrete evidence.

Another irrational argument was provided by the rabbit. There was tension throughout this debate because of the attack towards the horses. Humans have degraded the animals yet, they appraised the horse for being so majestic and perfect in every aspect. “In their handsome form and fine proportions… They have keen senses…” (122). These are marks of appraisal and approval made by humans. However, the rabbit contradicts this statement by saying how horses lack insight, “He’s just like a sword in this way, without sense, sentience, or spirit…” (123). The animals were seen to be protecting each other by stating how they were each created differently to serve a certain role yet, the rabbit throws this argument away. I believe this to also be a reason for which the horses himself did not have a say in the arguments between humans and rabbits because he has been domesticated to a point where they are slaves to mankind, similarly to the fables provided by Aesop and dogs.

The ways each side presented their arguments could have been improved in various ways. But the key factor that caused the biggest hole in the arguments were the horses. The humans stating that animals are imperfect to nature yet, appraising the horses and saying they are perfect. The animals giving the presentation that animals have been created a certain way that God intended yet the rabbit degrades the horses by calling them ignorant.