25 Jul Is Cloning Ever Morally Permissible Discussion
Is cloning ever morally permissible? If not, what best explains why cloning is wrong? And is genetic manipulation for purposes of enhancement permissible?”
Your paper must include a title! A good title communicates both the topic of the paper and your position.
Good titles
- A Case Against Assisted Reproductive Technology Bad titles
- Abortion
Given the length of the paper, your introductory paragraph must accomplish two goals in less than half a page:
(1)Briefly introduce your reader to the topic you are discussing.
(2)Succinctly state your own position on the topic in one sentence. The thesis statement is the most important element of your paper! You should upload your paper on the topic of immigration here! Remember, you have to write five (5) papers during the course.
Introduce the Topic
When introducing the topic, you want to answer two questions: (1) What are you talking about? (2) Why should the reader care?
A strong opening sentence can answer both of these questions! The opening sentence, or sentences, is sometimes called the hook of your essay, because it catches the readers attention.
Thesis Statement
The introduction of the topic is immediately followed by the thesis statement (1 sentence), which concludes the first paragraph and sets up the rest of your paper. In writing the thesis statement, you seek to answer the following question:
What is your position on the issue?
This is the single most important sentence of your paper!
Premises
You must discuss two or three premises in support of your thesis statement in one paragraph each! You can think of the premises as mini-arguments in support of your thesis.
A common way to argue in philosophy papers is to set up each premise as follows:
- Argument (e.g., “Genetic engineering should be forbidden because of the risk it poses to humans undergoing such procedures.”) •Refutation (e.g., “Little is known about the long-term effects of genetic engineering on living organisms.”)
- Example of a Premise
“The second argument in support of the ethical treatment of animals comes from a rights-based approach, in that nonhuman animals possess relevant characteristics that qualify them to at least the basic rights of the right to life, the right to some form of liberty, and the right to a life of some sort of happiness. Nonhuman animals are different from one another in that they have their own personalities, behaviors, interests, and no one animal can be replaced by another as the same. They are aware of what happens to them, and giving them less consideration as animals ourselves, would be considered a form of prejudice called speciesism, which is “the systematic discrimination of or against the members of some species by the members of another species.” A possible rebuttal to this argument is that moral consideration should be extended only to those who possess certain levels of rationality, intelligence, language, or those capable of reciprocating moral agreements. But how could any person stand behind that statement, and not also agree that those in a vegetative state have lesser rights than a functioning human animal? Or even that a human in a vegetative state has lesser rights than a trained chimpanzee? Surely, the chimp brain functions higher than that of a human being that has been unfortunately hurt to the point of total death of their brain. In another scenario, would any rational human being place the life of a mammal or a bird over the life of a human infant, or a mentally challenged, disabled, or declined individual?Conclusion A two-page paper does not need a conclusion! After discussing your final premise, you can either end the paper outright, or add a single concluding sentence to the paragraph. Whatever you do, do not write a concluding paragraph in the classic sense.
