The objective of this essay is to inform the reader(s) about human cloning. I believe that human cloning is morally wrong because one should not have the right to avoid daily responsibilities by getting someone else to handle them. There will be four sections of this paper that will be discussed. Firstly, there is an argumentative section, which will have premises along with a conclusion for an argument made against human cloning. Secondly, an explanation section, which explains how the argument against human cloning obeys the rules for a good argument. Thirdly, an objection section to where there are arguments that violates mine in order to demonstrate how objectors might object to the argument. Lastly, there will be a conclusion where I discuss …show more content…
P2: “In Most Human Cloning cases an experimenter is in a situation in which they can conduct a Human Cloning experiment that allows them to avoid dealing with daily responsibilities”.
Conclusion: “Therefore, in most Human Cloning cases it is morally wrong for that person to get an experimenter to create a Human Clone on their behalf”.
Premise one is a generalized argument, premise two is a specific argument, and the conclusion is the result of both premises. An explanation is due to be provided for how the argument posed obeys the two rules for a good argument. There are two rules for a good argument: Rule number one: “All of the premises are reasonable for you to believe”.
Rule number two: “The argument has a pattern such that if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true (or more simply that the conclusion follows or argument is
…show more content…
The P in the first premise stood for “a person is in a situation in which they want to avoid dealing with daily responsibilities” and the Q portion in the second premise stands for “it is morally wrong for that person to get someone else to handle those responsibilities”. P is the full second premise which states “In Most Human Cloning cases an experimenter is in a situation in which they can conduct a Human Cloning experiment that allows them to avoid dealing with daily responsibilities”. The Q part is “in most Human Cloning cases it is morally wrong for that person to get an experimenter to create a Human Clone on their behalf”. The arguments that I posed were great ones due to the fact that they strongly correlate the way in which a good argument should appear to resemble. The argument and example both matched to be specific or general in order to support
By providing a base argument and the implications of
Silver’s argument illustrates to his audience that reproductive cloning deems permissible, but most people of today’s society frown upon reproductive cloning and don’t accept it. He believes that each individual has the right to whether or not they would want to participate in reproductive cloning because it is their reproductive right. However, those who participate in cloning run the risk of other’s imposing on their reproductive rights, but the risk would be worth it to have their own child.
Cloning is an exciting and ongoing field of study with many great possibilities, and negative drawbacks; this leaves many Christians wrestling with the idea of cloning, trying to decide where to stand on, for or against it. To follow, in the paper is an explanation of what cloning is and the uses of cloning at the present and projected in the future. After that the focus will be on the problems with cloning from a non-ethical stance. Finally the issue of cloning and Christian’s views on it will be addressed.
If a random individual were asked twenty years ago if he/she believed that science could clone an animal, most would have given a weird look and responded, “Are you kidding me?” However, that once crazy idea has now become a reality, and with this reality, has come debate after debate about the ethics and morality of cloning. Yet technology has not stopped with just the cloning of animals, but now many scientists are contemplating and are trying to find successful ways to clone human individuals. This idea of human cloning has fueled debate not just in the United States, but also with countries all over the world. I believe that it is not morally and ethically right to clone humans. Even though technology is constantly advancing, it is not reasonable to believe that human cloning is morally and ethically correct, due to the killing of human embryos, the unsafe process of cloning, and the resulting consequences of having deformed clones.
In arguing against cloning, the central debate is derived from the fact that this unnatural process is simply unethical. The alleged
In conclusion, it is clear to see that cloning is not the taboo it has been made out to be. It is a new boundary that humanity has never encountered before and so it is understandable that people have qualms about ‘playing God’ by shaping a life. Although some might argue that it is immoral to clone human beings, the truth is that it is unethical not to. Given that such technology has the potential to save millions upon millions of lives, not tapping into that industry would have dire consequences on the future. In this case, the ends more certainly justify the means.
In the essay, Cloning Reality: Brave New World by Wesley J. Smith, a skewed view of the effects of cloning is presented. Wesley feels that cloning will end the perception of human life as sacred and ruin the great diversity that exists today. He feels that cloning may in fact, end human society as we know it, and create a horrible place where humans are simply a resource. I disagree with Wesley because I think that the positive effects of controlled human cloning can greatly improve the quality of life for humans today, and that these benefits far outweigh the potential drawbacks that could occur if cloning was misused.
Stephen Toulmin noticed that good realistic arguments consist of six actual parts. The extended method includes claims, data, and warrants, but it includes backing, qualifications, and a rebuttal, which are used to test the authority of a given warrant. The backing takes the warrants and adds additional evidence and reasoning to validate the warrant. With backing a warrant, there must be a way of qualifying statements expressing the degree to which the speaker defends a claim or to limit the strength of the argument to its truth. There is never just one view or one side of an argument, there are counter-arguments or statements called rebuttals that indicate the circumstances when the general argument does not hold true.
Many people say that everyone in the world has a twin. Today, science and technology has the ability to make this myth reality through the process of cloning. I am strongly against cloning for many reasons. People should not utilize cloning because it would destroy individuality and uniqueness, cause overpopulation, animal cruelty, it is against morals and ethics, and it violates many religious beliefs.
Arguments come in many different shapes and sizes. In its simplest form, an argument is nothing more than a conclusion supported by at least one premise. However, most arguments consist of much more than that. In order for an argument to be valid, there must be no imaginable scenario where the premise(s) are true, yet the conclusion is false. This constitutes an invalid argument and cannot be sound.
4. thought- shown in what is said when proving a point is enunciating a general truth
In the article that I chose there are two opposing viewpoints on the issue of “Should Human Cloning Ever Be Permitted?” John A. Robertson is an attorney who argues that there are many potential benefits of cloning and that a ban on privately funded cloning research is unjustified and that this type of research should only be regulated. On the flip side of this issue Attorney and medical ethicist George J. Annas argues that cloning devalues people by depriving them of their uniqueness and that a ban should be implemented upon it. Both express valid points and I will critique the articles to better understand their points.
The Benefits of Human Cloning In recent years, many new breakthroughs in the areas of science and technology have been discovered. A lot of these discoveries have been beneficial to the scientific community and to the people of the world. One of the newest breakthroughs is the ability to clone. Ever since Ian Wilmut and his co-workers completed the successful cloning of an adult sheep named Dolly, there has been an ongoing debate on whether it is right or wrong to continue the research of cloning (Burley).
Its aim is to establish a conclusion based on evidence which is supported by one or more claims