Paper #2 Final

“A Question of Ethics” Left Unanswered
In her essay “A Question of Ethics,” Jane Goodall, a scientist
who has studied chimpanzees for years, tries to resolve a complicated ethical dilemma: Under what circumstances is it acceptable to cause animal suffering to prevent human suffering? Her answer, however, remains somewhat unclear. Although Goodall challenges scientists to avoid conducting unnecessary tests on animals, she does not explain the criteria by which scientists should determine necessity.
Goodall argues that her readers have an ethical obligation to protect animals from suffering, but she also implies that it might be necessary sometimes to abandon that obligation. She points out that animals share similar traits with human beings: they have a capacity for certain human emotions, and they may be capable of legitimate friendship. Goodall’s evidence for this claim is an anecdote from her research. She recounts that one chimpanzee in her study, named David Greybeard, “gently squeezed [her] hand” when she offered him food (62). Appealing to readers’ emotions, Goodall hopes to persuade readers that the chimp is “sociable” and “sentient,” or feeling (62). According to Goodall’s logic, if researchers are careful to avoid tests that cause human suffering, they should also be careful to avoid tests that cause suffering for other life forms.
When Goodall asserts that scientists shouldn’t mindlessly test animals if alternative tests are available, she is in effect conceding that sometimes animals will have to suffer for the sake of helping human beings. Yet if it is unacceptable in some cases to cause sentient beings to suffer, why would it not always be unacceptable? When could compassionate people be comfortable with the prospect of causing David Greybeard mental and physical pain?

Goodall attempts to draw the line between ethical and unethical animal testing by stressing the idea of “essential” tests— those without which scientists could not adequately study certain human illnesses at all. In other words, Goodall seems to imply that it would be unethical for scientists not to test animals when such tests are the only tool available to alleviate human suffering.
But might there be other criteria that could determine whether animal testing is necessary? For example, the severity
of a given human illness might lead scientists to identify medical conditions that justify subordinating animal welfare to human needs. For nonterminal illnesses that cause people far less pain, researchers might delay animal testing or use alternative methods because in these cases concern about animal suffering outweighs concern about manageable human suffering.
By contrast, Goodall’s criterion of “essential” testing leaves open the possibility that as long as alternatives are unavailable or ineffective and as long as researchers do not differentiate among degrees of human suffering, mindless animal testing would be acceptable. Her assumption suggests that David Greybeard could suffer, for example, because inadequate computer simulations have prevented researchers from finding a cure for the common head ache or for mildly unpleasant pollen allergies. To make a more

persuasive case, Goodall should define essential and nonessential human needs.
Goodall could use another standard to determine whether animal tests are essential. Researchers might consider how society values the species of animal used in tests. Goodall has chosen in her David Greybeard example an animal whose physiological similarity to human beings encourages people to grant personhood to it. But other animals have much lower capacity for understanding and empathy than do chimps, dolphins, dogs, or cats. Rats, for example, are not typically conferred with human qualities because their emotional capacity is assumed to be far more limited than humans’. If rats are more distant from human beings than chimpanzees are, and if they justify less stringent protection, then might a test be “essential” if it could be performed on a rat, but “nonessential” if it could be performed only on a chimpanzee? Researchers could conduct more ethically responsible animal testing if they used some species and exempted others from testing based on a reasoned determination of their similarity to or difference from human beings in mental capacity.
Although Goodall perhaps intended to call for improving animal laboratory conditions, her essay has also raised some questions about this important ethical issue. The stakes of animal testing are too high and the issue too complex to leave the question of necessity unanswered. To treat human beings as well as animals with the dignity they deserve, medical researchers will need to continue refining their definition of essential. 

Work Cited
Goodall, Jane. “A Question of Ethics.” Newsweek International
7 May 2001: 62. InfoTrac Web: Student Edition. Web. 28 Oct. 2004. 

Rough 1.5

“A Question of Ethics” Left Unanswered
In her essay “A Question of Ethics,” Jane Goodall, a scientist
who has studied chimpanzees for years, tries to resolve a complicated ethical dilemma: Under what circumstances is it acceptable to cause animal suffering to prevent human suffering? Her answer, however, remains somewhat unclear. Although Goodall challenges scientists to avoid conducting unnecessary tests on animals, she does not explain the criteria by which scientists should determine necessity.
Goodall argues that her readers have an ethical obligation to protect animals from suffering, but she also implies that it might be necessary sometimes to abandon that obligation. She points out that animals share similar traits with human beings: they have a capacity for certain human emotions, and they may be capable of legitimate friendship. Goodall’s evidence for this claim is an anecdote from her research. She recounts that one chimpanzee in her study, named David Greybeard, “gently squeezed [her] hand” when she offered him food (62). Appealing to readers’ emotions, Goodall hopes to persuade readers that the chimp is “sociable” and “sentient,” or feeling (62). According to Goodall’s logic, if researchers are careful to avoid tests that cause human suffering, they should also be careful to avoid tests that cause suffering for other life forms.
When Goodall asserts that scientists shouldn’t mindlessly test animals if alternative tests are available, she is in effect conceding that sometimes animals will have to suffer for the sake of helping human beings. Yet if it is unacceptable in some cases to cause sentient beings to suffer, why would it not always be unacceptable? When could compassionate people be comfortable with the prospect of causing David Greybeard mental and physical pain?

Goodall attempts to draw the line between ethical and unethical animal testing by stressing the idea of “essential” tests— those without which scientists could not adequately study certain human illnesses at all. In other words, Goodall seems to imply that it would be unethical for scientists not to test animals when such tests are the only tool available to alleviate human suffering.
But might there be other criteria that could determine whether animal testing is necessary? For example, the severity
of a given human illness might lead scientists to identify medical conditions that justify subordinating animal welfare to human needs. For nonterminal illnesses that cause people far less pain, researchers might delay animal testing or use alternative methods because in these cases concern about animal suffering outweighs concern about manageable human suffering.

Essay #2 Rough

“A Question of Ethics” Left Unanswered
In her essay “A Question of Ethics,” Jane Goodall, a scientist
who has studied chimpanzees for years, tries to resolve a complicated ethical dilemma: Under what circumstances is it acceptable to cause animal suffering to prevent human suffering? Her answer, however, remains somewhat unclear. Although Goodall challenges scientists to avoid conducting unnecessary tests on animals, she does not explain the criteria by which scientists should determine necessity.
Goodall argues that her readers have an ethical obligation to protect animals from suffering, but she also implies that it might be necessary sometimes to abandon that obligation. She points out that animals share similar traits with human beings: they have a capacity for certain human emotions, and they may be capable of legitimate friendship. Goodall’s evidence for this claim is an anecdote from her research. She recounts that one chimpanzee in her study, named David Greybeard, “gently squeezed [her] hand” when she offered him food (62). Appealing to readers’ emotions, Goodall hopes to persuade readers that the chimp is “sociable” and “sentient,” or feeling (62). According to Goodall’s logic, if researchers are careful to avoid tests that cause human suffering, they should also be careful to avoid tests that cause suffering for other life forms.

Analyzing Hamal's Paper

Sarah Hamal's Paper:
1. a. The main point is how beauty pageants are dangerous.
    b. The thesis is clearly stated in the first few sentences.
2. a. Her reasoning's are that controlling mothers can cause stress.
    b. The authors quotes news articles.
    c. The reasons seem legit because the quotes are from psychologists.
3. a. The third paragraph is when the author addresses the counterarguments. These are proved wrong with facts.
    b. She responds respectfully and refutes them.
    c. She respects the counterarguments yet proves them wrong with data.
    d. Her arguments are good because they are backed by logical data.
4. a. The outside sources are used to prove the authors statements.
    b. The quotes are credible because they are from sources of people who have gone through the pageants themselves.
    c. Many of the sources are from 2009 which isn't too far in the past and still seem relevant.
5. a. The author addresses us with a question about sports to get the reader hooked.
    b. The author sticks to the third person format excluding you and we.
    c. We share the belief that children should not be forced into doing anything they don't want to do and they should feel comfortable with who they are.

Analyzing Page's Paper

Sarah Page's Paper:
1. a. The main point is about how designer babies are good for the environment.
    b. The thesis is clear and to the point at the end of the introductory paragraph
2. a. Designer babies are smarter than normal babies.
    b. In studies, designer babies IQ is up 20 points to the normal baby.
    c. The studies are done well and are legit therefore backing up the reasoning.
3. a. The counterarguments are recognized and thoroughly given a chance.
    b. The counterarguments are acknowledged and then responded to with the utmost respect.
    c. The other arguments are realized with great amounts of respect and then turned away due to evidence that proves otherwise.
    d. The arguments that are combating the counterarguments are based off research and studied evidence creating a sound combatant.
4. a. The cited outside sources are used as a complimentary addition to the position taken by the author.
    b. The outside information seems to be fairly unbiased in showing how designer babies can be good for society as a whole, not just one group.
    c. The sources are fairly current, the latest being 2013 and going up through 2014.
5. a. The writer assumes the reader to be oblivious therefore going into depth to create a background to help readers understand better.
    b. The language sticks to third person leaving out personal pronouns.
    c. I think the reader and I have a great deal of concern for the society we live in today and its nice to know that someone else other than myself feels it is important to live in such a society.

Think About the Genre (Personal)

Taking Positions(me):
Voting for democrat or republican
Who I want to win. Seahawks or cowboys.
Weather or not I think Marijuana should be illegal
What jordans I like more
Others Positions:
Who to pick on fantasy football
Who they think will win the world series
Who to vote for in the primary elections
Which NGO's should have government funding

Public Service Video

Summary: A short informational video titled "Two Sisters Tragic Story," informs people of the dangers of drinking and driving, by giving us a tragic story of girls that lost their life in a drinking and driving accident, further influencing them to form an organization devoted to giving safe rides homes to prevent an accident similar to this one from happening to anyone else.

Beyond Written Text

The addition of music, voice overs, an written words made Obama's "yes we can" speech so much more powerful. Unlike just listening to Obama give an already compelling speech, music, voice overs, and written words just made the speech really stick in your head. The music put a tune in my head making me sing to myself "yes we can." The voice overs made it memorable because i saw so many artists that I like. And written words also added to the visual aspect of it thus making it even more memorable.

Page 100

1. Katherine Sprigs convinced me that this topic matters by using her own experiences. She taught me about her home town and what it was like growing up. The topic became important because it benefits your town and it benefits the sustainability of the farm and the world. The small farms cause less waste and damage to society. This would also reduce the cost of every day things, like fuel. The long term advantages of local farms are much larger than the disadvantages.
2. Sprigs touches base on how people who do not agree with her argument validate their own. She uses Alex Avery as an example, and gives an appropriate response to his view. She also used the industrial issues as a counterargument, and then brings in facts from a reliable source to prove that they are wrong. She continues to comment on how even though the global effect has some negative outcomes, like children losing jobs in Bangledesh, the United States would be demonstrating how people can change the environment and the government.
3.The last paragraph is effective because she uses a clear position. She uses a response to a counterargument, and gives us a reason why the topic matters. Her reasoning is about  how food tastes better when grown in certain seasons, and she taps into peoples values by talking about how food is something we should enjoy and cherish.
4. The photos contribute to her argument by giving a better visual to her works. She shows a smaller, poly culture farm next to a large mono culture farm to show better how these look. It looks like the smaller farm is more fresh and delightful where as the large farm is more dry, and industrial. She also shows interstate trucking to comment on how expense it is to have to pay to move food sources from one place to another.

Topics

Position paper topics:

Should baseball be in the Olympics?
My position: Yes because if was in years prior and it remains one of the top sports in the world.

Does teen pregnancy have a positive or negative affect?
-Negative

Should college athletes be paid?
Yes

Should sex education still be taught in schools?
Yes because it is important but they should teach a certain type of sex ed.

"The Last Text" Summary and Analysis

An argument is a way to express yourself. You argue for or against something all the time without realizing it. It is important to understand how arguments work to make sure you can write the best argument you can. Arguments can be found everywhere in the media, and can sometimes be seen as manipulative. The purpose of an argument can be many things from trying to make someone understand a certain point of view or to more a decision on something as simple as where to eat. Religion, facts, statistics and personal testimony are all things you can use as evidence for an argument. It is important to keep in mind your intended arguments even though it can be perceived in many ways. What you wear and what you use to represent yourself give off a certain impression on who you are. You should make sure to think carefully about your argument and what you are trying to say. Make sure the source is a reliable one when looking at arguments of others. You should dig deep to find where it came from and if it is important to your argument as well. Make sure your stance comes across clearly and that it is reasonable and knowledgeable. If your argument matters to you, you should make sure it matters to others as well. Your claim should be strong and clear. A thesis can help support your claim. And make sure to appeal to all audiences.

Page 269-284

An argument is a way to express yourself. You argue for or against something all the time without realizing it. It is important to understand how arguments work to make sure you can write the best argument you can. Arguments can be found everywhere in the media, and can sometimes be seen as manipulative. The purpose of an argument can be many things from trying to make someone understand a certain point of view or to more a decision on something as simple as where to eat. Religion, facts, statistics and personal testimony are all things you can use as evidence for an argument. It is important to keep in mind your intended arguments even though it can be perceived in many ways. What you wear and what you use to represent yourself give off a certain impression on who you are. You should make sure to think carefully about your argument and what you are trying to say. Make sure the source is a reliable one when looking at arguments of others. You should dig deep to find where it came from and if it is important to your argument as well. Make sure your stance comes across clearly and that it is reasonable and knowledgeable. If your argument matters to you, you should make sure it matters to others as well. Your claim should be strong and clear. A thesis can help support your claim. And make sure to appeal to all audiences.

Mad Men

1. Heather Havrilesky's main insight about Mad Men is that it represents the current desire for more than what we have in America. It represents the difference between the American Dream and the reality for most people in America. Paragraph four, page 171 she writes "Somehow Mad Men captures this ultra-mediated, post modern moment, underscoring the disconnect between the American dream and reality by distilling our deep-seated frustrations as a nation into painfully palpable vignettes."
2. Havrilesky establishes her authority by connecting with the readers. She starts by addressing the audience clearly as Americans, and then goes on about how we are striving for more things. She insists that stories from when we were younger make an importance to expand our dreams.
3.She appeals to the readers emotions by bringing up what it is like to be an American and grow up in a country like ours. On page 170 she wrote "It's a sickness that's infused in our blood, a dissatisfaction with the ordinary that's instilled in us from childhood." She also took the time to connect through telling about stories the general public knows. On page 170 it is said "Having been told repeated stories about the fairest in the land, the most powerful, the richest, the most heroic, (Snow White, Pokemon, Ronald McDonald, Lady Gaga), eventually we buy into these creation myths and concede their overwhelming importance in the universe."
4. I did not know anything about Mad Men before reading this passage. I still do not want to watch it because I don't find shows like that interesting. I think that when I am older I will probably enjoy it, but for right now shows like Mad Men are too heavy for me.

Literacy: A Lineage

The author Melanie Luken starts Literacy: A Lineage by explaining the role her father had in her life of literacy. She elaborated on how they would go for bike rides every Sunday afternoon to a bell tower where they would read a poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. As they both aged, she started to go by herself making the bike riding a tradition.  Her literacy came from her fathers love of literature and her definition of literacy was changed because of who her father was. She comments on how their literacy was more than just reading and writing, but rather the tradition it held with it.

She goes on to tell who her father is. She writes about how he has tried almost every art, including poetry and song writing. At first he had hoped to become a professor, but ended up as a stay at home dad for his daughter making their relationship prosper and they became close even if it wasn't easy at times. She spoke on how intelligent and imaginative her father was and how that benefited her daily life as a child. He taught her famous quotes and when she learned to read and write she would do it as often as she could. She remembered going to the library as a child with her brothers, and the books she wrote her father for Christmas.

She goes on to touch base on how she majored in French, upholding her tradition of language. She had struggled with it because she didn't have a tradition from her childhood with French. She found that tradition had changed her definition of literacy and she wanted it to be a part of her lineage. She touches base on how she may not be rich with money or physical things but her father made her rich in love of literature and language. Even though he passed she still has these things to remember him.

Chapter 2

Types of writing I've done in the past week:
Texting
Tweeting
Facebook messenger
Notes for Art appreciation
English assignments
Art homework
Math equations
PolSci essays

Rhetorical Situations:  Tweeting, Notes, and PolSci essays

1. Tweeting: When I tweet, usually it's casual. My audience is my friends and other followers who can relate to the situation I am tweeting about. Usually these are other teens who are scrolling through twitter looking for something to make them laugh or to spark their interest. People can like or retweet my tweets if they like them. I tweet to express myself in the moment feelings or to tell other people what is happening in my life. This can be funny or serious. It is also normal to post pictures along with tweets.
2. Notes: Notes are usually casual, and the only people reading them are me. Unless my friends need notes for class, I am usually the only "audience". I write notes extremely casually, and try to take short cuts in my writing when taking them. Not always using full sentences or finishing words. When I take notes I like to use pictures as well to help me remember and associate facts with them. I also put a lot of my notes in color because the brain remembers color.
3. PolSci Essays: This week I wrote an essay based on elite theory. The whole text was formal, and was used to answer the larger question of government distrust. The audience was my professor, therefore I had to create a professional sense of writing.

Lydia's Story

Questions:

1. Brideau's main point is that even though bad situation people survived by staying calm and being brave. This is indicated in the last paragraph, especially in the last sentence.
2. Brideau wrote this story in third person  point of view, with the exception of the first and last paragraphs, which are in fist person point of view. This makes it easier to relate to the author, and during the story of Lydia it paints the picture of what is happening in your head. It also helps to separate which part is the author speaking and which part is Lydia.
3. She makes the story come alive by using specific details and describing emotions. Some specific instances of this are "Lydia climbed off the kitchen counter and waded through the deep water, dragging a small kitchen stool behind her." and "Her tongue became dry and her lips were cracked but she only was aware of being terrified of the water.". These help readers understand what she was doing and how she felt as she sat in her linen closet.
4. This piece would be originally for the readers of that health magazine. People like doctors, and nurses. The tone of the piece suits these readers because it is easy to hear her voice in her text, and she addresses the story like she is talking to a colleague. This is seen on page 131, when she states, " For me, the enormity of the double hurricanes became clean only after witnessing..". Some words that help connect to her are ones like I, hope, determination, and adversity.

About Me

My name is Nash Gowin and I am 17 years old. I am a running start student from North Kitsap High School and I am a senior. I live in a 3 acre plot with 2 dogs, a cat, 18 turkey and a pond of fish. I enjoy playing baseball, math, video games, and spending time with my brother and sister. My sister is 25 and works for Masterworks. My brother is 13, and is very energetic.

A few things about me you should know are I love the outdoors, I can't stand the color brown, I work at Central Market, I have a scar on my head from dancing like a ballerina, and one time a dog bit me.  After I graduate from high school, I plan on attending a four year university in California, and becoming a high school math teacher. I am very excited to see what this jump start does for my college education in the long run.

Analyzing an Argument

Russel Honre takes a look back at his career and makes a discovery that his father had told him at a young age. To be able to work is a blessing. Russel gives a brief background of his childhood work while Sarah Page gives a quick synopsis of what a designer baby is. Russel takes a position on his fathers position while Sarah  takes a position in response to the position of Dr. Paul Walman. Russel admits he was a little slow to realize his fathers wise words, at the same time Sarah  admits she was a tad skeptical about how designer babies could be good for the society. Russel sights his father more than once to show a more rounded view of his position while Sarah quotes Walman several times to show his full opinion on the topic. Russel has life experiences that help to prove his fathers point at the same time Sarah has statistics proving that her position is valid. Russel has examples of why his topic actually matters and Sarah has examples proving why people should care about her topic. Russel ends with a very blatant position in his conclusion with Sarah closing off very similarly.