Does The Student's Argument Answer The Paper Question Paper
1) Does the student’s argument answer the paper question?
Yes, Caroline argument answered the following question: Is Human Cloning morally acceptable? 2) What general principle is assumed in that argument? If no general principle is clearly stated, then what do you think is the general principle the author is assuming?
The general principle assumes that is a person has health issues that determine whether they live or die, then that person or an experimenter could follow through or conduct genetic experiments. However, I am a little unsure as to what she means about genetic experiments. Does she mean cases where something is genetically wrong with a person’s DNA? For instance, an extra strand of DNA could be a sign of dwarfism or some sort of handicap and so it a morally acceptable for a person to use genetic experiments to save a life or a living …show more content…
Yes, Caroline uses consistent wording in her argument. Common line used was “could save a life by using genetic experiments”
4) Does the student explain why she thinks that her argument follows all of the rules for a good argument? What should the student do to make this section better?
My partner mentions why the argument is good, however, when she states the rules for a good argument but she does not provide a through explanation. For example, “Premise one is a general rule that does not have to always deal with human cloning for example, a doctor could save a life by fixing just one gene in a person that is dying rather than making a human clone.” Her premise should be about something in general. It should not specifically relate to her argument.
5) What objections do you think someone might have to the student’s argument?
If someone were to argue against her argument they would probably say the following:
Objection 1 (Premise 1): “Why would you interfere with someone’s passing? If it is their time to pass away, then let it
Yes, Caroline argument answered the following question: Is Human Cloning morally acceptable? 2) What general principle is assumed in that argument? If no general principle is clearly stated, then what do you think is the general principle the author is assuming?
The general principle assumes that is a person has health issues that determine whether they live or die, then that person or an experimenter could follow through or conduct genetic experiments. However, I am a little unsure as to what she means about genetic experiments. Does she mean cases where something is genetically wrong with a person’s DNA? For instance, an extra strand of DNA could be a sign of dwarfism or some sort of handicap and so it a morally acceptable for a person to use genetic experiments to save a life or a living …show more content…
Yes, Caroline uses consistent wording in her argument. Common line used was “could save a life by using genetic experiments”
4) Does the student explain why she thinks that her argument follows all of the rules for a good argument? What should the student do to make this section better?
My partner mentions why the argument is good, however, when she states the rules for a good argument but she does not provide a through explanation. For example, “Premise one is a general rule that does not have to always deal with human cloning for example, a doctor could save a life by fixing just one gene in a person that is dying rather than making a human clone.” Her premise should be about something in general. It should not specifically relate to her argument.
5) What objections do you think someone might have to the student’s argument?
If someone were to argue against her argument they would probably say the following:
Objection 1 (Premise 1): “Why would you interfere with someone’s passing? If it is their time to pass away, then let it