Pros And Cons Of Frankenstein Counterpoint

891 Words2 Pages

Bring back extinct creatures, or leave them to a long time vanished world. Well, two authors faced the topic, and I believe the author arguing against it is the most persuasive and supported because of how they introduce and bring readers into the topic, give credible and relevant evidence, and analyze it really well.

First of all, the Counterpoint is more persuasive has an exceptional introduction. They first used a hook by describing the novel Frankenstein to get the readers interested in their argument. The author opens up by using the plot, "A scientist cobbles together a creature from old body parts and brings it to life" (Counterpoint para 8). This grabs the readers' attention and makes them want to continue, wondering what the introduction …show more content…

Make-believe can become reality, thanks to research on de-extinction. De-extinction is immoral, unethical, and dangerous. It should not be pursued" (Counterpoint para 8). The author uses the explanation of their hook to lead straight into their claim on de-extinction. It works well and is smoothly integrated, giving it credibility and persuasiveness, because it connects to the Frankenstein story. Along with the introduction to their essay, the start of each paragraph works really well, too. They open up the first paragraph by saying, To start, it is unethical for humans to mess with Mother Nature because, as the story of Frankenstein illustrates, we have no idea what havoc we might cause in doing so" (Counterpoint para 9). The author easily integrates the point they are trying to make by still including parts of their beginning, …show more content…

They do this several times, one of them being when they summarized Conservationist Rory Yong, who was interviewed by the Huffington Post, when the author declared, "[Rory Young] is “absolutely convinced” that African elephants could be extinct in less than a decade if they are not protected. Using them to incubate woolly mammoths hardly qualifies as protection—it is not ethical to harm one species to bring back another" (Counterpoint para 11). The author clearly uses evidence from a conservationist to back up their claim by using people in the scientific and conservational communities to support their arguments. The author also included dinosaur expert, Bob Strauss's opinion as he writes in “De-Extinction -The Resurrection of Extinct Animals,” “De-extinction is a PR gimmick that detracts from real environmental issues .What is the point of resurrecting the Gastric-Brooding Frog when hundreds of amphibian species are on the brink of succumbing to global warming? A successful de-extinction effort may give people the false, and dangerous, impression that scientists have ‘solved’ all of our environmental problems" (Counterclaim para 12). Overall, the author has evidence from a variety of different and credible resources that does very good job of supporting their

More about Pros And Cons Of Frankenstein Counterpoint

Open Document