Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8

PHIL 2D03/RS 2C03/PS 2D03 Name: Essay Title: Presentation of your issue: interest: clarity: Positive argument for

your position: presentation: quality: Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): success of response: Your writing: clarity: coherence: correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Convincingness of your case: Overall Grade: Strong aspects of your essay: 1) 2) Aspects which need improvement: 1) 2) General comments: a

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Human Reproductive Cloning Should not be Permitted Presentation of your issue: interest: Excellent clarity: Good Positive argument for your position: presentation: Needs Improvement quality: Fair Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): Fair/Good success of response: Good Your writing: clarity: Fair coherence: Good correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Good Convincingness of your case: Fair Overall Grade: C/C+ Strong aspects of your essay: 1) Well organized 2) Good response to counter argument Aspects which need improvement: 1) The positive argument was rather disjointed General comments: This is a well structured essay that shows a good understanding of the issue. I think that your response to the counter argument is good. However, I found your positive argument disjointed and difficult to follow. I think that this section would have been better if you had chosen to develop a single point instead of relying on so many diverse claims. I think that Pences argument should have been explicated somewhat. What is a wonderful genetic legacy and why does he think that cloning will provide it? Explicating the meaning of this phrase might have made the counter-argument appear stronger.

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Human Reproductive Cloning Presentation of your issue: interest: Excellent clarity: Excellent Positive argument for your position: presentation: Good quality: Good Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): N/A success of response: N/A Your writing: clarity: Good coherence: Good correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Good Convincingness of your case: Fair Overall Grade: C+/BStrong aspects of your essay: 1) Good positive arguments 2) Good introduction to the topic Aspects which need improvement: 1) The dialectical part of the essay was done incorrectly General comments: This is a well written essay that makes a number of good points. The positive part of your essay is solid. However, there are problems with the dialectical part. In the dialectical part of your essay you were supposed to lay out a counter argument and then expose the flaws with it (i.e. show how it violates the ARG condition). But although you give an explanation for why someone may wish to clone a child, I do not think that you give an argument for why they should be allowed to do this. Your attack on this position is really an example of a positive argument for your position and an attempt to expose the flaws in the argument for the opposite position.

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Same Sex Marriage Presentation of your issue: interest: Good clarity: Excellent Positive argument for your position: presentation: Excellent quality: Good Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): N/A success of response: N/A Your writing: clarity: Excellent coherence: Excellent correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Good Convincingness of your case: Fair Overall Grade: CStrong aspects of your essay: 1) Well written and organized Aspects which need improvement: 1) Did not deal with a counter argument General comments: This is a well written essay about a topic that you obviously feel strongly about. Your positive arguments are generally quite solid, although I do think that there are some problems with them. My principal issue concerns the dialectical part of your essay. In the second part of your essay you were supposed to lay out an argument for the opposite position and then show that this argument is flawed (it violates one of the ARG conditions). You lost marks by not doing this.

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Same Sex Marriage Presentation of your issue: interest: Good clarity: Excellent Positive argument for your position: presentation: Excellent quality: Good Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): Good success of response: Excellent Your writing: clarity: Excellent coherence: Excellent correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Excellent Convincingness of your case: Good Overall Grade: B+ Strong aspects of your essay: 1) Well written and organized 2) Good arguments Aspects which need improvement: 1) Positive argument would benefit from sub-arguments General comments: This is a very well written essay that shows a good understanding of the issue. Although your positive argument is good, I think there is still room for improvement. Many of the premisses in this argument are controversial, and should be supported by sub-arguments. The counterargument is rather rambling (though that is not your fault), but your response to it is generally excellent.

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Untitled Presentation of your issue: interest: Good clarity: Fair Positive argument for your position: presentation: Good quality: Excellent Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): Fair success of response: Good Your writing: clarity: Good coherence: Good correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Good Convincingness of your case: Good Overall Grade: BStrong aspects of your essay: 1) Well written 2) Good positive argument Aspects which need improvement: 1) Weak objection 2) Intro was a bit too long General comments: This is a well written essay that shows a good understanding of the material. I particularly like the positive essay for your position, which makes a good case for VE from the scarcity of medical resources (namely, doctors and nurses). My principal complaint concerns the objection to your position. The stronger the objection to your position, the better it is when you resolve that objection. I really didnt find the objection compelling. The fact that the majority of physicians oppose VE is relevant and could be the basis for a strong argument against VE. But trying to relate this point to Canadas political system seems to be a non-starter. I think that your intro was too long and detailed for this essay. I think that the intro would have been stronger if it was more concise.

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Untitled Presentation of your issue: interest: Good clarity: Excellent Positive argument for your position: presentation: Good quality: Fair Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): Good success of response: Fair Your writing: clarity: Excellent coherence: Excellent correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Excellent Convincingness of your case: Fair Overall Grade: C+ Strong aspects of your essay: 1) Well written and organized Aspects which need improvement: 1) Many of your premisses are more controversial than your conclusion General comments: This is a well written essay about a topic that you obviously feel very strongly about. However, I think that there are problems with some of your arguments. It is important to remember that an argument always reasons from premisses which are acceptable. Whenever a premiss is controversial, that premiss needs to be supported by a sub-argument. Many of the premisses in your positive argument, such as the claim that homosexuality is immoral, that God is opposed to it (which presupposes that God exists), and that children with same sex parents will grow up with low self-esteem are very controversial, and need to be supported. Your counter-argument raises a number of interesting points in what appears to be a convergent argument pattern. But if the argument is convergent, you need to show that all of the premisses are false. Your response to this argument only discusses an analogical element of the counter-argument.

HUM 2C03 - Essay Name: Essay Title: Untitled Presentation of your issue: interest: Excellent clarity: Excellent Positive argument for your position: presentation: Excellent quality: Good Counter-argument and response: quality of objection(s): Excellent success of response: Excellent Your writing: clarity: Excellent coherence: Excellent correctness of spelling, punctuation, sentence composition: Excellent Convincingness of your case: Excellent Overall Grade: A Strong aspects of your essay: 1) Well written and organized 2) Good arguments Aspects which need improvement: 1) Some of the premisses in counter argument are not sufficient to establish conclusion General comments: This is a very well written essay that shows an excellent understanding of the issue. Your positive argument is ultimately based on the idea that health-care professionals have an obligation to respect a patients autonomy. I think that this is a very good basis for an argument for VAU. Your counter-argument and response to it is careful and intelligently written. However, I am not sure that P3 and P5 are sufficient to establish C6. The premisses in this argument deal with what may be the case, which the conclusion deals with what can (or cannot) be the case.

Verwandte Interessen