The famous animal rights activist Tom Regan in his article Animal Rights, Human Wrongs speaks about a necessity of a radical approach towards animal rights. He states that it is necessary not to reform the way animals are exploited, but to totally abolish this exploitation. In order to make his arguments persuasive the author widely uses ethos, logos and pathos. The examples of ethos may be found at the very beginning of the article. The author appeals to his personal experience giving many examples from his youth. For instance, he describes the life of his family after the Great Depression, when a welfare has been measured with food, which this family has been able to buy. Regan describes the experience of his work in a butcher shop, such presents as mink hat given by him to his wife and his experience in a dissection of experimental animals during his student years. Describing all these events of his life, Tom Regan states that he has not liked his working as a butcher as well as the animal experiments. However, like everyone else, in his young days he has not worried about moral aspects of such attitude towards animals. Later on, impressed by the war in Vietnam and by the study of Gandhi, Regan has revised his opinion. Now Regan is famous as a philosopher and an animal rights advocate. He is an author of many books dealing with a protection of animal rights. Regan is known as a vegetarian. While describing his decision to refuse from meat, Regan appeals to logos. “I knew that my good health did not require animal flesh in my diet. So the logic was fairly obvious: the violent slaughter of animals for food was unnecessary” (Regan 3). Moreover, Regans decision to become a vegetarian to a great extant has been predetermined by his reading of Gandhi, from which he has known that a cow is a sacred animal in India. In this country, beef eating is a deep sin. Regan states that he “feels the same way about cats and dogs” (4). The author uses logos to emphasize a ridiculousness of this situation. What is the difference between a cat and a cow? We used to eat pork and at the same time, eating dogs is inadmissible for us. Regan states that it is a nonsense that our choice of food is predetermined by religious traditions or prejudices of any kind. Throughout the article, Regan describes cases of a cruel attitude towards animals causing in such a way a reader to feel guilty. The author is very knowledgeable in this sphere and he vividly describes terrible conditions of animals living on farms. A factory farming is a business, which is subdued to economic benefits. Apart from a short period of live of these animals, they are treated as “biological machines” (Regan 12). In such a way, Regan resorts to pathos exiting pity to “hogs, chickens, turkeys and other animals raised for human consumption” (12). The author gives a particular emphasis to a trapping describing it cruelness and senselessness. Regan condemns the partiality of people for furs. Describing barbarous methods of the trapping, the author resorts to pathos trying to make a reader to feel a pain that experiences a caught animal. As Regan puts is “a physical trauma of a trapped animal has been likened to a slamming door on a finger” (16). Moreover, a suffering of a