Evaluation Of A Good Argument

1394 Words6 Pages
7.3 – Neutralization of the fallacy:

In paragraph 4 the author has violated the sufficiency criterion of a good argument. The author has violates the sufficiency criteria by committing the fallacy of false analogy. In paragraph 4 the author states, “In the mid 1940s – before publicly funded healthcare – my grand parents sold their car to pay the hospital bill related to my father’s birth, so “purchasing” the birth of a child is nothing new.” This is a wrong analogy. Just because you pay for hospital bill and cloning, does not make them the same. In one situation, two persons life is preserved, and in the other a person’s life is changed. The author could have avoided this fallacy by not comparing these two totally different situations at all or giving an analogy that has the same situation as human cloning.

7.4 – Positive Critique:

In the fifth paragraph the author argues that the paternal and maternal linages are not the most important thing as what we identify ourselves with us humans, which is quite convincing. As his first premise he states, “Most people I know do identify with both their maternal and paternal lineages.” As his second premise he states, “Dual heritage may be normal, but it is seems central to our conception of ourselves as humans.” And as third premise he sates, “And identical twins seems none worse for the knowledge that they are not genetically unique individuals.” Even though that was said that this argument is convincing, it is not without
Get Access