"Zoos have to educate the public about the value of animals so that they understand the importance of conservation. After a fun experience at the zoo, people leave with a newfound knowledge and understanding. How are they going to learn these things if they don’t get to see the animals? Zoos and aquariums give people an appreciation for the animals. They need to see, listen to, and smell an elephant. Viewing an animal on TV does not give a person the same kind of love and respect for the creature as seeing it in person does.
The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) is the major accrediting body for zoos in North America . AZA’s standards require excellence in animal care and welfare, conservation, education, and research before a zoological park is eligible to receive their stamp of approval. Accredited zoos all over the country are actively supporting conservation projects in the wild. Most zoos are actively involved in numerous projects to preserve and rescue a wide range of endangered species from elephants to amphibians. In 2007 alone, the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium raised over $716,000 for field conservation. Because of tireless conservation efforts, species like the snow leopard and the mountain gorilla have overcome near extinction and will have the opportunity to see future generations."
Keeping animals within a zoo is not the best idea for them no matter what way a person looks at it. A zoo is a place to hold the animals and restrict them from acting out their natural behaviors. Humans feel that it is just a prime format for protection for the animals. That is true; however, they are being protected from hunters and poachers but that is their natural environment and moving them from it is not the best because they begin to lose whom they truly are inside. They are kept in a cage 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, and cannot roam about freely. That’s like a completely different atmosphere for the animal and would make it want to act out in frustration towards the fact that it was taken from its homeland. It’s not right that they have to stay in one place all the time. The food that they are given is not what they are used to either. The meat that we eat is filled with protein which is what we eat and is good for us but the animals that have meat as a part of their diet, may not receive the same benefits from the eat as we do. The same thing goes for the animals that are vegetarians. The same kinds of plants that they eat are probably not in great supply in America and may have to stick with the basic grass that grows out in the lawn. Therefore, the animals have a chance of not being in good health and full of nutrition as many of us think they are. It is best to just leave them alone and stop trying to figure out what it is best for them when it really is not.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how big zoos make their enclosures and attempt to make it resemble an animal’s natural habitat, it will never be the real thing. Animals are not meant to be cramped within small enclosures; it is not best for them. Zoos restrict the animals from roaming freely and migrating into the wild, instead they stay in the same monotonous living space day after day. While zoos protect animals and provide them with food and water, it is not best for them because they have been removed from their comfort zone. Animals are meant to be in a free environment of danger, where they hunt for food and learn to protect themselves, it is their natural instinct. Instead, they are given set food everyday that they probably do not thoroughly enjoy. People assume that animals are content to be living in zoos when in reality most of them are not. Many of the animals show signs of stress and boredom inside their cages by doing repetitive movements, proving they are not as happy as they may appear. Some of the animals in the zoo become so frustrated from living behind these bars they will attack visitors at the zoo. These attacks have happened numerous times and sometimes lead to death. Not only human lives can be taken at zoos but the animals as well. Animals that live in zoos life expectancy is normally shortened compared to how long they would live if they were in the wild. This is not fair to the animals; they do not deserve to lose years of their life for people’s entertainment. For these many reasons, it is best that animals are not confined in zoos and should instead live in their vast natural environment where they belong.
ReplyDeleteIn Response to Kassandra: You're counterargument is very well supported and is similar to mine. I also like that you included such details about the animals diet. I did not think about the negative effects it may cause. I also think your closing statement is very effective because it is a very true statement. Just because people think zoos are beneficial for the animals, it really is not.
Animals are not meant for any sort of confined space, whether it be a cage, an aquarium or any other items. Learning about a certain animal only helps if the animal is seen interacting in its natural habitat. Caged animals are tamed and taught different commands. Wild animals act they way they are born too.
ReplyDeleteZoos and aquariums provide a safe place for humans to observe a creature but seeing them in a cage does not make them knowledgeable of that animal. For example, a mountain lioness is a born-hunter. Seeing her lounge around in a cage illustrates the wrong image for society. The only safe way for everyone to understand their behavior is to either watch a documentary on tv or go on a tour with an expert guide.
The movement of saving endangered species is greatly appreciated, but for the purpose of this argument, caged animals do not and cannot display their true colors.
In response to Kassandra, I completely agree with you. Caged animals are trained pets instead of their true personalities running wild and free.
While zoos may keep some endangered species and helps provide and protect them, the fact that an animal is taken out of its own natural habitat and forced to live somewhere is cruel and unnecessary. With all of the resources and availability we have in society today, we have plenty of knowledge and understanding about animals and do not need to force them in a place to live in order to educate. Any animal will not act natural in a forced environment, rather leaving them in their own habitat will help them survive and be free. Many animals roam, such as those in Africa. For example, elephants and other herds of animals roam for many miles each day. They eat their own killing and survive based on how nature intended them to. By keeping the animals in a zoo, it prevents them from having this availability and takes them out of the norm. By isolating the animals in the zoo, they are kept away from the herds that may contain hundreds of their species and stops them from assimilating and populating. The average lifespan of zoo elephants is about 16-18 years, while wild elephants can live 50-70 years (veganpeace.com). Another example of animal mistreatment is the workers at the zoo. Someone can come in on any bad day and not feel like working so they decide to neglect the animal. Animals need their own true natural habitat to grow and develop, and zoos all over prevent this from happening.
ReplyDeleteIn response to what Kassandra said, I saw our common point in which you stated that the animals cannot roam about freely. This is very true and I also took note to the fact of the food they are given. It is not the true food they would eat in the wild and probably has some affect to their health. Good points and strong argument.
Zoos may provide entertainment for the humans who visit them, but are they really what's best for the animals who live there? Animals in captivity are at distinct disadvantages to their relatives who are allowed to roam freely in their natural habitat because of the care and protection zoos offer them. When the animals who live in captivity are re-introduced to their natural environment, they no longer know how to hunt or work with other members of their group to survive, and they are often killed or abandoned. This is caused by the fact that once an animal is taken out of their natural habit, they will no longer act naturally. For those who remain in zoos for life, they also are not living the way they are meant to. Sure, endangered species can be spared and bred in zoos forever, but if they never get to return to their homelands and roam free again, then they are not really the same animals they used to be. Their diets, daily activities, instincts, and the way they interact with others are all altered because of their time spent in the zoo. I also think it may be going a little far to say that humans need to see animals in the flesh to appreciate them. This is selfish, because it isn't fair that we should get to decide when animals get to be taken from their families and homes. Imagine if someone tried to take you away from everything you've ever known and put you in a cage for the rest of your life. Sure, they'd feed you, clean you, and make sure you're in good health, but that doesn't mean you'd be happy.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Bree: I like how you said that seeing an animal lounging around in a cage is completely different than watching them hunt in the wild, like they're meant to do. People get the wrong ideas about animals from zoos, and if they ever approached one in the wild, they'd probably be in for a big surprise.
The idea of a zoo is great in concept but it is actually very hurtful to animals. A zoo does provide means for people to see these animals and build respect for such marvelous creatures but as humans we should respect them enough to leave them in their natural habitat. By putting an animal in a zoo you are teaching and showing these animals a totally different world that is nothing like the world they came from. The animals are going to become reliant on people for food and not on themselves to find and hunt food down. This creates a problem when they are released back to the environment these animals are not going to know what to do because they are so used to getting everything handed to them like in the zoo. They are not going to be able to fend for themselves and ultimately will be the death of these animals. Another problem with zoos are the fact that once these animals become part of the zoo and the rehabilitation process they are so accustomed to being taken care of that they are not released back into the environment. I feel that the zoos hurt animals for then they actually contribute to them not just on the animal’s part but also the society. Society’s negative impact on these animals outweighs the positive effect that can come of them being sheltered. I feel that animals were put into nature for a reason and that is their home and that’s where they should stay because that’s all they know.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Nicole
Your counter argument is very good. I like what you said and how you presented it. Your absolutely right that a animals habitat in a zoo will never resemble the real habitat that they come from.
Zoos are good for the education about animals to the community, and can also be entertaining. However, keeping an animal in the zoo could disrupt the ecosystem that they came from. Taking out certain animals from the wild will mean that others will be in surplus and could lead to the extinction of a species. Keeping a wild animal in the zoo is not wise because they have their wild instincts. Those instincts could take over while in the zoos durning feedings, and may harm the other animals while trying to get food.
ReplyDeleteFeeding the animals day after day would affect the animals instincts and may not behave the say way as it would in the wild. Animals in the zoo act differently than that of the wild so it may not be as educational as argued to be. In order to properly learn and study animals, the animals have to be in the wild. Which is why watching a television documentary may be the best thing. It will teach you everything you need to know about an animal without having to go into the wild and seeing it for your self which would be dangerous. It is also more entertaining to watch the animals in the wild. Seeing how all the animals in an ecosystem interact.
In response to Bree, I think your argument is good. You provide some great examples and details need to support your argument.
Keeping animals in a zoo can be educational for people, but it is not beneficial for the animals in almost every aspect. Every zoo tries to create an enclosure that is as similar to the animal’s natural habitat, but it will never be like the real thing. Keeping them in a confined area is not like their natural habitats because it is preventing them to be able to roam their natural patterns they would have in the wild. Another reason why keeping animals in zoos is because no matter how hard the zoo keepers try, the animals in the zoo will never have quite the same eating pattern. In the wild, animals have to succumb to the natural environment and its changes. For example, with lions, each season brings different types of animals to hunt, where as in a zoo they are typically given the same thing and are not given the opportunity to hunt for it. It is the same situation for animals whose diets are mainly greenery. Many plants are not in season throughout the year, and while at zoo’s they may provide that animal’s favorite vegetable, it may not be an accurate depiction of their natural environment. Keeping animals in zoos may be a way to protect animals, but its survival of the fittest, right?
ReplyDeleteIn response to Bree
ReplyDeleteI think you gave really good examples to back your counter argument. But I think you should have provided more reasoning to support your examples.
Although some believe it is necessary to keep animals in zoos for educational purposes, not many students learn from these animals at zoos. Most students study the biology and behavior of these animals in the classroom. Most biology and zoology classes conduct dissections to further study the anatomy of some animals. There isn’t much learning one can do just from looking at an animal in an altered and controlled environment. Students don’t observe an animal in its natural habitat with its natural behaviors and feeding habits. To a certain extent, the animals in the zoo are somewhat domesticated since they are provided and cared for. Zoos are more for entertainment than they really for educational purposes. Those in favor of keeping animals in zoo argue that zoos provide conservation for endangered species. Although some zoos do extensive work on the conservation of some species, they alter the natural living habits of animals and prevent them from surviving and interacting properly in the wild; zoos take away from the animals’ natural instincts such as mating, hunting, and feeding. If humans infringe upon an animal’s ability to survive in the wild, they may hurt conservation efforts. These poor animals are locked up behind bars 24 hours day, 7 days a week in a small and confined area. Although it may not seem like it, some animals suffer from depression, being separated from their family and having limited mobility in their area. Animals shouldn’t be locked away in zoos, but rather let free in their natural environments.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Nicole Harper’s post:
I agree with your position, and I like the way you organized argument. Some of the point you mad were excellent ideas I hadn’t thought of myself. I agree that it is cruel to have animals in such confined areas and it was interesting that you said it might shorten their life.
Although beneficial to humans, zoos are not beneficial to animals. Animals are meant to be in their natural habitats roaming free. Attempting to recreate an animal’s natural habitat is good and all, but it still isn’t the real thing. There’s a big difference between allowing an animal to roam completely free and allowing it to roam around in a caged off area. By taking animals out of their natural habitats and putting them in a zoo you are changing what is natural to them. In some ways, taking animals out of their natural habitat could be seen as cruel in inhumane. Seeing animals in a zoo is not necessarily even educational to humans. Seeing an animal on television in their natural habitat is more educational than seeing an animal caged up. Animals in a cage act far differently than animals roaming free. Animals in the wild learn to hunt for food, while zoo animals are shown a completely different lifestyle by having food fed to them regularly. Animals’ natural instincts are changed when they are caged up in a small area in a zoo. Once those animals are released back into the wild, their habits and instincts are changed completely, and that can be very harmful for them. Animals are not naturally supposed to be in zoos, so they shouldn’t be.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kassandra Carr: You made some very good points in your counterargument. Your point about animals’ diets was a good one that I never even thought about.
While Jack Hanna makes a valid argument for why Zoo’s are an important necessity in our society, he forgets to mention their impact on mother nature and the instinctual changes that zoo’s all over the nation are causing to their animals. It doesn’t matter how much money they raise or what they do to protect the animals, the point is that they are not meant to be kept in captivity for the periods of time that they are in fact kept for. I don’t disagree with the rescuing of animals who may be endangered or hurt while in the wild, but I don’t condone the non-release of these animals back into the wild once they are treated. By keeping the animals captive, they forget how to fend from themselves and become heavily dependent on human care, and become inept to return to the wild. The problem with Zoo’s in general, is that they may argue for providing a very important service, they are actually causing an imbalance in the ecosystem by not allowing the animals they keep to be natural beings. Animals are meant to roam the wild, do as the please, mate with whom they choose; they are not meant to be in cages, have scheduled feeding times or even be required to be apart of shows for human entertainment. Its one thing to aid in times of need, but its another to not return these species back into the wild, even if it means the possibility of not surviving. Philosophers argue that the treatment of animals is something humans are supposed to value; it is a matter of treating them as means and not means to an end, just as we would treat each other in human interaction. But ultimately, these creatures are their own species, and need to be left alone, unless in times of dire need. Most zoo animals are not meant to be domesticated, and the zoo staff should not try to achieve that so called status.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nicole’s post. Zoo’s may seem like they are providing a kind service to the animals they keep, but they are ultimately restricting their freedom. I like how she points out the human error in determining what the animals want. They are not rational beings who can express how they feel and the lives they want to live. They are guided by instincts first and emotion last. If they feel threatened or scared in a situation, they will act upon it with no expected consequences, because they are creatures out to fend for themselves. They do not recognize heroism, zoo animals merely relate to the animals of their own species, and need to be kept in the places that they can live the way they want.
Keeping animals contained in cages in zoos is harmful. Wild animals are meant to roam free outdoors, not pace around in cages. Yes, zoos educate the public, but there are also other ways to educate about wild life. Documentaries, museums of natural history, and educational speakers are beneficial in educating the public without taking them away from their natural habitat. Animals need to be free to roam in nature and act as they normally do. Without them being in the wild, they become domesticated to being fed, being cleaned up after, and depending on humans for their survival. Being in captivity will most likely result in the animal not being able to be released into the wild ever again. Being in captivity takes away their natural qualities; and deprives them from fully enjoying life. If nature conservationalists care so much for animals, why reduce their lives to a cage with people pressing their faces against the glass every day staring at them? Yes, it can be educational, but it is also very cruel. People should not have the right to take animals out of their natural environment for their entertainment. Wild animals belong in the wild, and that is where they should stay. Also, viewing an animal in a cage does not give you the full experience, because animals act differently when they are confined to a cage then if they were raised in the wild. To get the full educational experience, one should take a safari or something similar. Animals that live in a zoo also have a shorter life span than those that live in the wild. Animals in captivity live shorter lives than ones in the wild, because they are often more stressed and are unable to do various things that wild animals can do/learn to do in the wild (Answers.com). Animals should not have to take years off their lives for the selfish intents of zookeepers. It is wrong.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Evan, I completely agree with your counterargument. You give good examples, especially about animals acting differently in their natural habitat than a caged area. We seemed to make a lot of the same points, so I think you did a good job!
While zoos help to educate the public, they also provide an unnatural, confined living environment for the animals. Animals are born in the wild with all the living space they need. It is cruel to take an animal out of their natural habitat and place them in an enclosed zoo. Animals are not supposed to be locked in cages to entertain the public. They are meant to live on long stretches of land. Some animals roams miles each day, something they are incapable of doing in a zoo. Many animals, such as elephants show repetitive behavior as a signal of stress. The small spaces they are placed in are not enough to fulfill their needs. Recently I went to Busch Gardens and saw the tiger display. It was very upsetting because all I noticed was the tigers pacing back and forth, something I’m sure they would not do in the wild. They were given minimal land to roam and were surrounded by the public with their flashing cameras. Also, many of these animals are used to living in herds, schools, or packs. In zoos, they are kept alone or in pairs. Seldom they are kept in large groups as in the wild. They animals taken into zoos face many disadvantages. For instance, fish are placed in small tanks when they are given huge bodies of water to live in- after all; our planet is 70% water. Also, birds often have their wings clipped, removing their possibility of flying. Many animals are adapted in such ways that they are unable to go back to life in the wild. While many zoos feel they are highlighting the importance of conservation, they are truly harming the innocent animals.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Dillon Cole: I agree with what you stated in your blog. I feel zoos will lead to the ultimate death of these animals. They are meant to be free in the wild, not forced in a confined space. It is not in the best interest of the animal and if they really cared they would not torture the animals
Jack Hanna has made very good arguments when it comes to saying that Zoo are good but have you ever thought about what being caged does to the animals. The cages act like a prison for animals. The zoos may be good to teach about the animals but they are not always good for the animals. They may be good to start conservation but to me it would be really bad to put an animal in the wild if born in captivity. The animals do not know what it is to roam freely and go out and look for their food. Their food is normally just given to them. Also they are protected and are checked on daily, if they were ever let back into the natural world they would not know how to live. They would not know what to do. They have had pretty much everything done for them. The animals are trained and know way of life. They would not be able to live anywhere else but a zoo.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kassandra Carr, I complete agree with you. Everything you said made since. Also it was very well written.
Zoos are an inhumane way of displaying animals to humans. The argument above claims that people will be more inclined to help animals or donate towards conservation if they can see the animals live in a zoo. People who feel the need to help conservation efforts or donate towards conservation organizations are not going to be persuaded to do so by going to the local zoo. Even if this were the case animals can be seen on TV as well as non living displays such as museums. It is completely cruel to capture animals and put them in captivity as a display for people to watch. It is even worse to breed exotic animals and have them give birth in captivity. This is obviously an unnatural process that changes the animal’s lives forever. These animals can never be released into the wild because they have become to accustom to interacting with humans whether it be petting or feeding. Nothing is worth the price that animals pay for being held captive. In most situations the living conditions at the zoo are intolerable and downright unsanitary. These conditions often lead to health problems in the animals and all too often death. In many cases captive animals are often mistreated by their handlers and abused. No one is there to stop or prevent this. The only ure fire way of preventing all of the above problems would e to put a nation-wide ban on all zoos that exist as an amusement attraction.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Nicole.
You have made a counter argument similiar to mine, which I obviously agree with. We both stated that animals should not be kept in zoos because it limits their natural freedom. You also stated how animals become to accustom to humans feeding them. Overall great argument!
Regardless of how individuals attempt to justify why they hold animals in a cage 24 hours seven days a week, it is unjust and cruel towards the animals. The overall goal of a zoo is to make profit. There is no need to capture animals and hold them in cages just for the entertainment of others. Also, zoos often have shows in which they train the animals to perform for crowds. This is very cruel and selfish. The article states the motivation of zoos is to provide knowledge to the public about the different species in the world. However, most people do not remember the small information they learn from the zoo. They only know the names of some of the animals from their experience in classes or watching tv or other sources. Those who go to the zoo rarely take the time to learn about the animal that they see.The article also states that zoos help protect animals from predators. If this is true, then instead of capturing this poor creatures they should set regulations to help them. As far as saving the animal from other animal predators I don't believe that this is the job of human kind. There is a natural way that organism obtain food and unfortunately that includes animals killing other animals. Therefore, I do not believe that there is any valid justification for capturing animals for entertainment purposes.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kassandra Carr, I agree that the animals will not receive the type of food that they are biologically accustomed to.
The wildlife is where animals are supposed to be. Yes, zoos educate and amuse humans. Yes, some zoos are for wildlife conservation. However, are we sure that we should take animals out of their natural habit and place them in an artificial form of their homes, just for the benefit of human growth and amusement? While some believe that the animals are benefiting by being placed in a zoo, there are a few others that believe that the succession of animals is being altered. If an animal is endangered, some believe that this is a part of evolution to become extinct. Yet, I to enjoy going to the zoo and looking at the many species of animals, on the other hand, numerous cases of animals being violent to the humans are rising. Just recently, Shamu at Sea World killed his trainer and at a San Francisco zoo a tiger mulled a visitor to death. Animals definitely should not be in cages, tanks, or any other type of captivity. They belong in their natural habits to act a tiger should, as a gorilla should, and so forth. Animal should not be performing tricks; that’s why they have the title of being wild animals. Furthermore, how do you learn from a caged tiger? The tiger once again is not in its natural habitat, so some of its traits and behaviors are going to be altered drastically. Finally, animals do not belong in zoos, but where they were before they were whisked away in cages to become entertainment.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kassandra:
I agree completely with what you are saying. I never thought about the different food they feed the animals, yet that just adds more to your argument.
It is injustice to believe that keeping animals imprisoned in cages all day and night is humane. Animals like to be free and run wild, but unfortunately can not do so while being confined in a cage. Their environment in the wild is completely different to their small cages. Some may argue that zoos protect the animals from hunters and other animals, but most of the rest of the species is out in the wild. Some animals are also forced to perform shows for further entertainment. There is no real other purpose to that than making money. This does not benefit the animal in any way. Animals in zoos are fed on a schedule and can’t chose what to eat or when it eat it. They are constantly being watched by hundreds of people in the zoos efforts to make money. The animals don’t benefit from having their lives in invaded. Seeing animals in cages does not help you learn about how the animal because the animal behaves completely different in the wild. When people see the animals on TV, you see the animal behaving how to normally would, making it more educational than seeing the animal in the zoo where it has been trained to do tricks that are not natural habits. Animals that are born in zoos are unable to learn any natural habits and only know one way of living. If there were ever to be released into the wild again, they would not be able to survive. There is no real reason to keep animals locked in cages at the zoos.
ReplyDeleteIn response to curiouskat:
I agree with your argument, zoos have the public interest more at hand than the actual animals.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEven as a kid, I was never a big fan of zoos. Sure, Jack does make a good point in stating that by visiting a zoo, we as humans are able to fully experience the animals and wildlife we see on television. We are able to see the size of the animals, the coloring, their behavior, eating habits. But what we see is a filtered version of the real thing. Keeping an animal in captivity their entire lives reduces their need to use the survival instincts that they were born with. From the times that I have paid visits to the zoo, the animals I see in front of me are not the animals on t.v. at home that swing from trees or gallop through plains. Instead, the animals displayed are lackluster and empty. Keeping animals in captivity deprives them of their truest natures. To be in their open natural habitat where they can utilize all of the tools evolution has equipped them with. I also notice from visits to the zoo that animals seem lifeless. I get excited when I see an animal move to another area of the habitat because they are so unhappy in their habitat that they simply sleep all day long. Smaller animals like birds, fish and reptiles have more space to move, being so small, but these animals once again are out of their natural ecosystem. Birds are restricted to only the space in their cages to fly and fish are constricted to tanks. Neither are able to truly experience the wind and weather or the undercurrents of the ocean.
ReplyDeleteTo Evan, i agree with your claims that by keeping animals in zoos, we are changing what is natural to them. In my argument, I make similar claims about how animals lose their nature when taken out of their natural habitats.
In response to Nicole:
ReplyDeleteThe reasons that she gave for the counterargument are justifiable. She mentioned some ideas of the animals attacking the humans which is something I never mentioned before. The counterargument would have been ideal for that article.
Although most zoos are well kept and the animals are well cared for, there are still some zoos who slip under the wire of the AZA and their animals are taken care of at the minimal requirements to keep the animal healthy and alive. Also, if you go to any zoo at all, everything smells like animals or animal dung. In the wild, an animal is not forced to live in one spot. An animal can have its place for eating, its place for resting, and its space for doing its business. It's not forced into living in the same confines as some of the nastier bits of life and run free.
ReplyDeleteKeeping an animal caged up, mostly excluded from other kinds of its species, depriving animals of their natural instincts such as hunting and basic survival skills are repressed and discouraged for the safety of their human caretakers. If these animals are then ever expected to re-enter the wild, they have been trained to wait to be taken care of and this could lead to the death of the animal when released. Also, if this is contiuned through different offspring of the animal, they instincts could be bred out of them as they are domesticated. The effects of this could be inherited by the young of the captured animals, which makes their attempt of survival in the wild slimmer than they could have had.
In response to Brooke.
ReplyDeleteYour points are good, they are mostly the same ones that I also used, but you should explain more to be convincing of your point. You should also have more than just one argument to back up your opposing view of the topic. It helps to have more reasons than one to make your argument stronger.