The following argument involves the use of emotionally loaded language. Write a well-crafted version of the argument, replacing the emotionally loaded verbiage with more neutral language. Is it wrong to conduct medical research on animals? Is it wrong to trap an innocent creature, one whose only crime is availability and no representation, to confine it in dreadful isolation, in an inhumanely small space whose environmental conditions are foreign, to force feed it on the cheapest diet possible, and, in the interim, to perform ungodly acts upon it causing horrible pain?
What will be an ideal response?
1. Animals used in medical research are captured, confined in small and unfamiliar spaces, fed inexpensive food, and caused to suffer or experience pain.
So, 2. Conducting medical research on animals is wrong.
You might also like to view...
Answer the following statement(s) true (T) or false (F)
We can apply equivalence rules to parts of lines in a proof as well as to entire lines.
The fallacy of concluding that some earlier event is the cause of some later event, when the two are in fact not causally related is also known as
A) Non causa pro causa. B) Post hoc ergo propter hoc. C) Oversimplified cause.
With reference to the movie Ex Machina, do you think it is necessary to provide AIs with personhood in order for them to behave more human-like (emotionally)? Discuss Kant's views on the subject.
What will be an ideal response?
INSTRUCTIONS: Select the best answer for the following problems. According to De Morgan's rule, ?(P • Q) is logically equivalent to:
A) P ? Q B) ?P • ?Q C) ?P ? ?Q D) P • Q E) P ? Q