Shelby Nisbet
Taking Sides Assignment
Issue #12
Questions for the Yes side
Summarize the major thesis.
The major thesis is that genetic modification is immoral because it has started as attempting to
treat diseases and genetic disorders but is starting to become consumer driven to make
improvements in themselves.
Briefly state in your own words three facts presented.
Researchers have developed a gene that has prevented and reverses muscle deterioration.
It’s legal to prescribe medication for purposes other than what they are FDA approved for.
Sex of children can be determined through an amniocentesis which was developed to check for
genetic abnormalities like Down Syndrome.
Briefly state in your own words two opinions presented.
There may eventually be a subspecies which would be made up of the people who have kept
their natural born qualities.
He doesn’t think that the problem with genetic enhancement is to undermine the effort or destroy
human agency. He thinks the bigger problem is that we are trying to redo what nature has.
Briefly identify as many fallacies as you can.
I was unable to identify fallacies on the yes side of this story
Identify in your own words the propaganda techniques used, if any (mention the actual
propaganda statement).
I did not notice any propaganda techniques being used.
What cause/effect relationships were stated or implied by the author?
The cause and effect relationships stated or implied by Michael J Sandel were that if you were to
genetically modify someone you are threatening to “banish our appreciation of life as a gift.”
On the No side:
Summarize the major thesis. Howard Trachtman’s thesis is that genetic enhancement should not
be acceptable. It is what doctors and scientists have been doing for years and years.
Briefly state in your own words three facts presented.
The abuse of erythropoietin by athletes hasn’t detracted from then improvement in patients with
end stage renal disease.
In the1970’s immunizations practice became the standard and diseases that were being
vaccinated for started to vanish.
Briefly state in your own words two opinions presented.
Outcomes of procedures hardly ever live up to their claims and sales pitches.
He says that it is true that knowledge can and will be misconstrued.
Briefly identify as many fallacies as you can (not just the type, mention the actual fallacy).
I was unable to find a fallacy, he had sources listed for things I questioned.
Identify in your own words the propaganda techniques used, if any (mention the propaganda
statement).
What cause/effect relationships were stated or implied by the author?
Final stand: I don’t believe that genetic engineering is ethical or moral.
Which of the two sides (yes or no) is more biased? Provide reasons.
Which of the two sides (yes or no) is more empirical? Provide reasons.
Which of the sides do you side with and why - explain with details.
I side with the yes side of this story. Yes it is unacceptable because you are trying to change
nature. Being a human is about being unique. Diversity in our world comes from everyone being
born and keeping the things that make them quirky or different. Life would be boring if we were
all from the same mold. I appreciate being short, others embrace being tall. I enjoy the sense of
accomplishment I feel when I work hard to learn or complete something. If I were to use some
sort of enhancement I’d miss out on the feeling of accomplishment. Life isn’t meant to be easy.