Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Is genetic engineering worth the risk?, Joyce Harper, Analyzing those…

- - - - Joyce states that testing procedures could be done in another way, such as prenatal diagnosis, in comparison to genetic modification.
      - Premise1: - There are alternative testing procedures available, like prenatal diagnosis.
      - Premise2: - Joyce suggests that these alternative methods are worth considering in comparison to genetic modification.
      - Con; Therefore, Joyce is presenting the idea that alternative testing methods like prenatal diagnosis should be considered alongside genetic modification, without making a final judgment.
      - Straw man fallacy:
        -This remark suggests that the panelists' difference on fundamental infertility therapy immediately implies a disagreement on genetic enhancement regulation, which is a exaggerated version of the panels' argument. On these two subjects, the panelists may disagree, thus agreement on one does not always mean agreement on the other.
        
        Premise1: - The panelists agree that there is no widespread consensus regarding fundamental infertility therapy, including issues like donor egg and sperm age limits.
        
        Premise2: - The complexity surrounding infertility therapy suggests that regulating genetic enhancement will also be a challenging task.
        
        Premise3: - The panelists hold the belief that more research is required to comprehend the benefits of genetic enhancement technology before its widespread clinical application.
        
        Premise4: - The panelists have varying opinions on the ethical aspects of genetic editing.
        
        Conclusion: - The panelists collectively agree that the lack of consensus in fundamental infertility therapy and the resulting complexity will present challenges in the regulation of genetic enhancement.
        
        Straw man fallacy
        Joyce misrepresents Sarah's position by developing a weaker version of Sarah's argument and then denying it. Sarah particularly opposed employing genetic enhancement for purposes other than medicine, though not against all types of it. As a result, Joyce's reply ignores the substance of Sarah's claim.
        
        Premise1: - Joyce emphasizes that she is not undermining individuals who have used pre-implantation genetic testing or prenatal diagnosis for specific medical reasons.
        
        Premise2: - Joyce distinguishes between the use of these techniques for medical reasons (inherited disease) and genetic enhancement.
        
        Premise3: - Joyce has been making this distinction between medical reasons and genetic enhancement for an extended period.
        
        Conclusion:
        
        Joyce's main point in her response is to clarify that she does not criticize or undermine individuals who have used pre-implantation genetic testing or prenatal diagnosis for medical reasons, and she has maintained a clear distinction between such medical uses and genetic enhancement for an extended period.
  - - - Premise1: - Sex selection using genetic techniques is a topic of discussion.
      - Premise2: - The practice of sex selection through genetic techniques has the potential to undermine the value of both male and female individuals.
      - Premise 3: - The use of genetic techniques for sex selection can create a slippery slope.
      - Premise4: - This slippery slope may lead to increased class division by favoring the selection of males over females in the community.
      - Conclusion: Joyce Harper's main argument is that sex selection through genetic techniques can have negative consequences, including undermining the value of both sexes and potentially contributing to a wider class divide within the community.