Evaluation Of A Good Argument

Clone appraisers believe that cloning isn't okay at all, and that people should refrain from doing it. As stated in paragraph 8, implanting an embryo is an

2. The most effective argument in his essay is when he says “Millions are suffering. This is precisely the argument that research-cloning advocates are deploying today to allow them to break the moral barrier of creating.” In this argument he points out how the research advocates can't be trusted because a year ago, they assured they only wanted to do stem cell research on discarded embryos. He also points out that the research advocates create new excuses in order to keep breaking the moral barrier. In addition, they promised to only grow human clones only to the blastocyst stage. In other words, they would not create a human embryo in the laboratory. Today, they are campaigning hard to permit research for the creation of human embryos. This shows us that the research advocates are not keeping their promise because they are campaigning in order to create human embryos. The author's

Another supplementary argument can be made on the topic of medical advancements made possible through the cloning process, mankind will be provided with organs and cells with which human’s lives will be saved. If a person needs an organ transplant the normal means of transplantation would involve the removal of an organ from another person. This organ could be rejected and many complications could arise, often with deadly repercussions. Human cloning would involve using the person’s own cells that could be cloned to produce a healthy, normal organ for use in the person. Through this process, there would be no

Many important events in our nation's history were influenced by persuasive arguments. Many sides have gained support due to the writings or speeches gave by an effective speaker. These arguments take a lot to be effective. There are three key components, and if an argument lacks any one of them, it is not effective. Organization, diction, and bias words are all important aspects to any effective argument. Using these three elements, Thomas Paine was able to make a triumphant case, whereas James Chalmers' writing did not and was therefore ineffective.

With that comes the pros about cloning and why we should do it. There's a lot of reason why for example, it can help the LGBT community by providing a child without having to use a sperm donor. Which is crazy I know but makes a lot of sense because the LGBT community gives everything to have a child but they can't really have one together from the same parents. Well cloning came up with a idea that they should try to cloning a child for that lesbian couple and they did do it. Which that really gives everyone hope because we can grow together. In Article “Argument for and Against Creating Human Clones” in paragraph three on the third sentence it state that “Human cloning could allow parents of a child who died to seek redress for their loss”. That means that instead of just cry about your love ones who died you can just clone it. It really opens a big door for us and how we see and view things. It gives us hope about our future and what it might become. Did you notice that the quote said it “Could allow” it didnt really say it was already done or it can be done. Which leaves a huge cap there, Cloning is not good for anyone it take everything away from us humans as well as the meaning of us living.

In 1976, Congress passed the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in response to a growing national concern about public exposure to toxic chemicals. Since then, it has largely been hailed as a failure for two reasons. First, TSCA has been unable to effectively compel producers to test and disclose adequate information on chemical toxicity. Second, it has been ineffective at designating sufficient resources to the EPA to identify and reduce the possible health and environmental risks associated with new chemicals. Nonetheless, it has been devoid of major revisions since its implementation. In the nearly 40 years of congressional inaction on this issue, many states have intervened by enacting stricter chemical laws that fill in TSCA’s gaps.

At the beginning of the article Stock provides the reader with background information about his education and accomplishments. He states that he is a former director of the program on Medicine, Technology and Society at the University of California, Los Angeles and the best-selling author for his book Redesigning Humans. Providing this kind of information to his target audience makes his argument credible and suggests that he has done research related to this topic. Throughout the article Stock presents himself as a strong advocate of embryo engineering and how he wants others to be informed about the new change. All over the article the author points out his opinion and believes towards germinal choice technology and provides the audience with reasons why this method should become legal. An example of this, is when Stock mentions that germinal choice technology should not be compared to human cloning he argues that this method is wrong and should not be implemented based on his experience. This allows the audience to know how serious the situation is. The use of direct observations helps the reader to better understand the information

Inspire the Fire. For me, my favorite part of Northwestern is the students, and the life that they breathe into this campus, so for me, it is only fitting that the slogan would center around my favorite qualities I see in Northwestern students. The first part of the slogan, "inspire", is because Northwestern students inspire me in so many ways. They inspire me with their kindness, their wit, their integrity, and their ability to grow. Being in an environment with smart, driven, and thoughtful people have challenged me to be a better person. The second part of the slogan, "fire", refers to the passion Northwestern students carry. On a daily basis, I meet students working hard to make it on Broadway, perform ground-breaking research, and make impactful social change in their communities. While our interests may vary, every Northwestern student works hard to achieve their goals. “Inspire the Fire” embodies both of these qualities, and Northwestern would not be the school that it is without either quality.

Middle school was a rough time like it was for many because I still did not even know who I was yet. MIddle school was very difficult to adjust to at first because all my life I had only been in one class all day everyday with the same teacher and they made sure you always had a note to remind you of your homework for the night. Middle school was when I began to make my own choices and had to suffer the consequences that came with those choices. In middle school is when I found out how much I liked business because of a field trip my 6th grade year to Biztown which was a small fake “community” that everyone worked in and would be a citizen in the town.

When I received feedback on my work from both the instructor and my classmates I tried to take all of what was said into account. Considering no person is the same, they will all feel something different when they read the essay, I tried to make it so that it wasn't as direct and had more information within it to explain why I felt my argument was important. This way it is easier for the audience to read as it is written in a way that can hopefully work for everyone in one way or another.

Moreover, in passage two of Asking the Right Questions, the conclusion made is that cloning can provide positive medical benefits. The reasons that support this conclusion are that clones can be used for human transplants and cloning can be used to help combat certain diseases. Is there any information omitted? Why are there no numbers included in their argument? Who made this argument? How do they know that people will benefit from cloning? Are there negative outcomes to cloning? Is cloning costly? Who gets cloned?

When examining how human cloning can increase reproductive freedom, we must first look at what a clone is by definition. “Clone” in its verb tense means to make an identical copy of or in biochemistry, to replicate a fragment of DNA placed in an organism so that there is enough to analyze or use in protein production. This process can be performed for many different uses such as being used to grow in labs, embryotic treatments, genetic screening, anti-aging processes, and reproduction. It is important to note that “human cloning” of embryos will not produce an exact copy of an individual. Rather, it will replicate the same genotype to create a different individual human. ***As a reliable background, in this paper, I will be consistently referencing two main scientific articles. The first is from John Harris, a professor in the Institute of Medicine, Law, and Bioethics at the University of Manchester. His article “Goodbye Dolly” focuses on the nature and practicality of cloning. The other research article is by Alix Magney, a lecturer at the several universities who focuses on bioethics and medical health professionals, and highlights the investigations of the negative impacts of human cloning.

To introduce the relevance of both his and Ishiguro’s work, he quickly summarizes the political and scientific history of clones in the early twenty first century, thus presenting the ethical debate of creating life for scientific organ harvest. While Jerng admits that the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) and President’s Council on Bioethics (PCBE) prohibited cloning, he suggests the fluidity of opinion regarding clones, especially with familial context. When presented as an option to give grieving parents another opportunity with their dead child or to supply extra organs for the insurance of the health of the population, cloning children viewed as a valid, ethical option. However, Jerng warns that the “emphasis on the traditional family installs a normative narrative of individuation that closes off models of what it means to be human” (374). Because cloning threatens individuality, a traditional family cannot be sustained because parents will not treat the cloned child as their own biological child. As a result, the idea of whether clones are “whole” individuals becomes significant in determining their

Both my tutor at the writing center and my one-on-one peer reviewer mentioned that there is not enough evidence. They said that my proposition and reasons are evident; however, I do not have enough supporting details to convince readers of my argument. In my next draft, I plan to add more evidence in order to strengthen my claim while attempting to keep my argument accessible to a variety of readers.

The first problem that human cloning encounter is it is one of unethical processes because it involves the alteration of the human genetic and human may be harmed, either during experimentation or by expectations after birth. “Cloning, like all science, must be used responsibly. Cloning human is not desirable. But cloning sheep has its uses.”, as quoted by Mary Seller, a member of the Church of England’s Board of Social Responsibility (Amy Logston, 1999). Meaning behind this word are showing us that cloning have both advantages and disadvantages. The concept of cloning is hurting many human sentiments and human believes. “Given the high rates of morbidity and mortality in the cloning of other mammals, we believe that cloning-to-produce-children would be extremely unsafe, and that attempts to produce a cloned child would be highly unethical”, as quoted by the President’s Council on Bioethics. Since human cloning deals with human life, it said to be unethical if people are willing to killed embryo or infant to produce a cloned human and advancing on it. The probability of this process is successful is also small because the technology that being used in this process is still new and risky.