How well does the author provide an even and balanced argument? Can you tell what the author really believes? Although the author has tried to present an equal argument by presenting both sides of the case the tone of the argument is strongly biased against PAS. There are many more arguments showing the potential hazards and arguments against PAS, and those that argue for it are vague and emotionless-as though the author had read them somewhere but felt no connection to them.
Those against are filled with emotion. Which point is the author’s strongest? Why? The strongest argument against PAS was the potential for misdiagnosis, simply because it has been known to happen in the medical community that terminally ill patients will live for years beyond their original prognosis. There is a very real possibility that the patient could continue to live for years after their diagnosis but would lose those years by electing to have a doctor put an end to their suffering.
How well does the writer respond to each previous argument? The author presented the arguments well, with facts given to support the belief that PAS was either right or wrong; however, again, the tone of the paper was strongly biased against PAS. How can the author improve the introduction and conclusion in order to meet the assignment criteria? (check the assignment if you have questions about the requirements. )
The topic of the paper would have been more clear if the focus was either shifted to the Oregon Death with Dignity Act or the act was clearly separated from the concept of physician assisted suicide to present a straightforward statement regarding the topic and introducing the fact that there are two views rather than leaving the reader wondering if the argument is about the act or physician assisted suicide in general. Where does rebuttal need to be more clearly tied to the previous claim? Are there other, stronger rebuttals that the author hasn’t included?
The author clearly presented the rebuttal to PAS and the passage of the Oregon Death with Dignity Act. It would have been more effective to clearly present one side, then the other, allowing the reader to easily follow along and separate each argument rather than being left with the feeling that the author was saying, “The act is legal, but this is why it’s unacceptable, but…. ” Clearer separation of the two arguments would have been more objective and easier to understand. 6) What is the best thing about this essay?
Cite one specific example where the writer does this well. The quote from the doctor’s Hippocratic Oath was an excellent argument, shifting the responsibility from the legality of PAS to the ethical nature of the argument-are doctor’s actually shirking their duty by helping patients die? The argument from this viewpoint is much more black and right than the government’s right to interfere with a person’s personal decisions. 7) Are there important parts of the debate that are not discussed in the paper? Where should they be included?
A clearer explanation of why a patient’s psychological distress can interfere with their decision making process would have been nice (from a medical viewpoint), and the historical precedent is very pertinent to this argument (as are the number of unreported PAS every year). 8) Are there specious or fallacious arguments in the essay? Are there arguments that border on being fallacious? No, arguments are firmly based in fact with historical, medical and legal precedent to back them up. Essay Number 2: How well does the author provide an even and balanced argument? Can you tell what the author really believes?
The author presents both sides of the argument very well; they appear to support the sales tax but do present a clear argument for why sales tax may not be the answer to the economy’s problems. On a side note, the argument seemed to be whether sales tax would fix the state’s financial problems rather than if a sales tax was either necessary or right. Which point is the author’s strongest? Why? The point that a sales tax would continue to provide a steady flow of income even during times of unemployment and recession, because that is a reality for most states that is strongly impacting their local and national economy.
How well does the writer respond to each previous argument? They respond very well to each argument, presenting both sides of the issue clearly and with facts rather than opinion. How can the author improve the introduction and conclusion in order to meet the assignment criteria? (check the assignment if you have questions about the requirements. ) Again, clearly stating the focus of the argument would have made the argument easier to follow. The conclusion, however, stating that it was in the voter’s hands, was excellent. Where does rebuttal need to be more clearly tied to the previous claim?
Are there other, stronger rebuttals that the author hasn’t included? Rebuttal was very well done but left some question as to whether they were arguing for sales tax in general or whether sales tax would be the answer to the current economic recession. What is the best thing about this essay? Cite one specific example where the writer does this well. Are there important parts of the debate that are not discussed in the paper? Where should they be included? Are there specious or fallacious arguments in the essay? Are there arguments that border on being fallacious? No, all arguments are well founded in fact.