Axia College Material Appendix E Critical Analysis Forms Fill out one form for each of the two articles provided for your topic. You will fill out one for the “pro” article and another for the “con” article. Please make sure to follow the instructions in the syllabus carefully! If you do not want to use this form for the Final, I will also accept answers in numbered paragraph form. Let me know if you have questions! Source 1 Animal Experimentation Is Always Justified by Jennifer A.
Hurley| Opposing Viewpoints Digests: Animal Rights. Ed. Jennifer A. Hurley.
San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Identify the principal issue presented by the source. | The principle issue in the article discuss that animal experimentation has improve the life of human beings. Also they review how animal experimentation has assisted scientist explore new drugs and vaccines for illness and diseases for people. Furthermore this article explains that scientist performs these experiments on the animals in a safe and un-harmful manner.
Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. This author is bias in his writings because he doesn’t display the other views of this issue. In the being he states that scientist believe in animal experimentation for its natural medical process. Even though some information presented are facts based on scientist opinions and this information is mainly produced from animals rather than humans. The first and third paragraph the writer shows opposing views toward the subject and he disfavor the issues by expressing “It would certainly be nice if this were true” Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous.
If none exist, explain how you determined this. | Semantic ambiguity- Some patients spent their entire lives inside an iron lung, with the ceiling as their only view of the world”. Ceiling is referred as the top which is no limit. A syntactic ambiguity- there could have been no oral polio vaccine without the use of innumerable animals; a very large number of animals”. The statement is ambiguous and is not clear. Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning. | I view the source crediable because it accurate and is based on facts and opinions by experts. The writer uses direct quotes from experts.
Even though it is biased there is no doubt about the credibility of the source. Sources background and my own personal observation is not conflicting with the claims made in the issues. Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. | Hyperbole rhetorical devices and stated; “Among the most hideous aspects of the disease was the iron lung” Using the word hideous is exaggerating for describing iron lung. No others rhetorical devices in the article. Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. Burden Proof- “When animals rights activists assert that animal experimentation does not save human lives; Why would scientists use experiments on animals if it wasn’t for medical purposes. Inconsistency ad hominem states “No scientist, researcher, or doctor enjoys experimenting on animals, especially if those experiments involve suffering” also states “The sacrifice of any animal is unfortunate, but if that sacrifice saves human lives, it is completely justified.
This argument uses deductive logic. Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this. | The author states “Animal rights activists condemned the treatment, claiming it was wrong to kill the baboon. Would it have been right to let the AIDS patient die untreated? The sacrifice of any animal is unfortunate, but if that sacrifice saves human lives, it is completely justified. ” The author uses moral reasoning and mentions that animal sacrifice is unfortunate, but it is right thing to do if it saves human lives|
Source 2: Animal Medical Experimentation Is Unjustified by Peggy Carlson| Peggy Carlson. Current Controversies: The Rights of Animals. Ed. Tamara L. Roleff. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Identify the principal issue presented by the source. | Main issue is that animal experimentation is unreliable, costly, and benefits no one. Human illnesses could have been preventable and the reason people get ill as in the past because there has been many improvements in sanitation. Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this. This article is biased. In the beginning paragraph the writer states on the topic through her experience. The information in the first paragraph is based on opinion is stating how animal experimentation is undependable and does not benefit anyone. The writer states “I also know that behind this human suffering is another level of suffering, more hidden from view: the suffering of animals used in costly and needless experiments that benefit no one. ” This is an example that the author is bias and she clearly agrees that animal experimentation is unreliable| 3| Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous.
If none exist, explain how you determined this. | Ambiguity is semantic and the author expresses “Again, animal experiments in this area have not correlated well with human disease. ” She does not express the statement being made like whether it is talking about the area as in location or area as in position of study. Second example “There are scores of examples of differing reactions of drugs between animals and humans. ” Does it mean score as in points, score as in music, win, or numbers? This is very unclear what the author was trying to explain here. Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning. | Credible. The information presented is proven or confirmed by professional people who are working in a specific field. The author is bias in the first paragraph and expressed her opinions, she is a physician and her opinions are credible. The claims are completely supported with facts and hardly any opinions are expressed in the article. The author is bias in the beginning but after the first few paragraphs the information was based on facts, examples, and quotes from professionals in the medical field.
If none exist, explain how you determined this. | The article did not contain any fallacies. The author presented the information and her ideas without any errors in reasoning. And she with frame from saying anything that would discredit or destroy the validity of the information presented in the article. | 7| State one argument made by the author. | The author states in Reliable and Risky? Animal experiments results frequently do not apply to humans and doesn’t create medical advances. Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
This argument uses inductive logic. Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this. | The author uses moral reasoning in the Research budget paragraphs. The author mentions how large sums of money go in animal experimentation. The author believes it’s wrong because other medical research can lead to medical improvements but don’t because not enough money is being funded in those areas of research. Alll areas of medical research and experimentation can bring medical successors|