Essay Available:
Pages:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
8
Style:
MLA
Subject:
Education
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 23.76
Topic:
Should Scientists Test Products on Animals
Essay Instructions:
Philosophy: Argument (or persuasion) can be defined as any communicative act that expresses a point of view. Almost every communicative act (written, spoken, visual) is an argument (persuasive).
Appeals to an audience: Think about who you are pitching your proposal/solution(s) to.
- Appeals to reason/logic
- Appeals to emotion
- Appeals to the credibility of the rhetor (author, speaker, artist)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Topic/Inquiry: Interest and/or concern about a topic leads to questions and a search for answers
Genre: What form of communication would be most effective?
Content & Organization: What are my parameters and/or limitations? What will move my audience to contemplate, to consider, and/or to act?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Stephen Toulmin's Model of Argument
Reasons: Why is it important? What are you contributing? (causes/effects)
Claim: The statement being argued/proposed.
Qualifier(s): Limitations to the claim (under these conditions)
Evidence: Personal experience, anecdotes, data, facts, authority (past, present, future)
Warrant(s): Underlying values/beliefs; acknowledged viewpoint/lens/standpoint
Backing: Support for the warrant
Counterclaim(s): Counter-arguments or statements indicating circumstances when the argument does not hold true
Rebuttal(s): Response to the counter-argument(s) that supports the claim being made
“An argument written in this manner unfolds to reveal both the strengths and limits of the argument. This is as it should be. No argument should pretend to be stronger than it is or apply further than it is meant to. The point here isn't to ‘win' or ‘beat' all the counter-arguments; the point is to come as close to the truth or as close to a realistic and feasible solution as we possibly can….Toulmin's model reminds us that arguments are generally expressed with qualifiers and rebuttals rather than asserted as absolutes.” (cited from http://web(dot)cn(dot)edu/kwheeler/documents/Toulmin.pdf)
 
OUTLINE OF A PROPOSAL
I. Introduction of the problem/proposal
A. Material to get the reader's attention (a “hook”)
B. Introduce the problem or topic
C. Introduce the claim, perhaps with accompanying qualifiers that limit the scope of the argument (narrow your focus)
D. Introduce your reasons – Why is your proposal important? What are you contributing?
II. Body
A. Very briefly, you may need to provide some background information, such as a brief history.
B. Very briefly, you may want/need to provide your warrant, underlying assumptions/values/beliefs associated with the proposal.
C. Offer evidence/examples in the form of several main points. Keep in mind the appeals to an audience (logic, emotions, credibility).
D. Discuss any counterclaims and provide a rebuttal for each.
III. Conclusion
Essay Sample Content Preview:
Name:
Professor:
Class:
Date:
Should Scientists Test Products on Animals
Introduction
The use of animals in product testing and medical experimentation is an issue that has influenced debates among scholars and activists fighting for the welfare of animals. In these tests, animals are exposed to suffering through pain and fear. However, experiments and tests conducted by the scientists do not justify safety for the human beings. This is because many of the products that have been made and tested through the animals have not been effective among the people. It has been estimated that tens of millions of animals are used annually in projects and experiments that are funded by private entities and federal agencies. In addition, it is estimated that mice and rats account for 90% of the animals used in these projects and experiments. Different legislations have been enacted at states level to exclude the animals used in scientific projects. However, it is only the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), which sets requirements standards of housing, care, and treatment of animals used in the laboratories. This shows that many issues have been overlooked regarding how the scientists test products on animals. This essay is a discussion of why the scientists should not test products on animals.
Should Scientists Test Products on Animals
According to National Anti-Vivisection Society, toxicity tests in which the safety of chemicals and products is determined was established in the 20th century. This shows that continuation of testing products on animals as practiced by the scientists in the 21st century is a continuing traditional scientific practice. Experiments are conducted to detrmine the level of irritation caused by certain products and chemicals on the skin and the eyes of rabbits, mice, and rats in order to determine the potential effects on the human body. Statistics indicate that 50% of animals on which the products are tested die during the experiements (Kelch 121). The primitive scientist tests by the scientists including LD50 and the Draize tests are still conducted by the modern scientists. The practice of testing products on animals has therefore been a common practice. It is important for the scientists and researchers to develop alternative methods of testing products as a way of enhacing the welfare of animals.
It is unethical and morally wrong to test products on animals (Norman, Jackson and Rosenbaum 177). However, the government can allow the act on the condition that scientists recognize animals as living things with senses and therefore suffer from torture. Many products and devices that are are manufactured and sold to the consumers are subject to strict regulations by the government. The government agencies responsible for the regulations require that goods sold be safe to the people, environment, and the animals. As a result, it is a requirement that manufacturers should conduct toxicity tests on products before they distribution into the markets. This has exposed many animals to torture since specimen products are tested on them. Most advocates that fight for the rights of aninmals oppose vivisection on ethical grounds (Haynes 34). In this regard, they argue that it is morally wong to benefit one species at the expense of another. The life and the welfare of the animals is more important than scientific researches, most of which take many years before providing a useful product. In addition, some of scientific researchers use many financial and economic resources that can be used to improve the welfare of animals. Different states have different laws regulatig animal experimentation and hence companies can shift operations to different states depending on the areas where their operations are favored. In this regard, the laws regulating the test of products on animals should be clearly defined at the federal level to enhance safety of the animals. A federal legislation about test of products on animals would extend to all the states leading to significant changes on how scientific researches are conducted.
The government law making agencies should enact legislations that barn testing of products on animals (Kennedy Institute of Ethics F. Barbara Orlans Research Associate, Georgetown University 164). In addition, legislations should be enacted to restrict animal experiementation in search of products that imptrove human welfare. However, these legislations should give excemptions to researches conducted in the medical field. The main reason for such excemptions is the fact that animals are tortured in tests that have no significant value to the human beings. For instance, in the tests conducted for cosmetics, no much gain has been achieved. It is of no need to end the lives of animals for activities that add no value to the humans or nature. This depicts disrespect of life of the animals, which is against moral values of maintaining the natural environment. It is important to recognize that the life and the welfare of animals used in experiements and tests is important than the personal desires of the scientists. This means that tests of cosmetics on animals do not justify animal experimentation. It is only the congress that should be mandated to enact legislations that support animal experimentation and tests. Corporations that conduct research based on animal tests and experiements can however, shift operations from one state to another depending on the desired situations for their activities. In this regard, the law should be well defined to state the kind of researches intended. Well defined legislations will play a significant role in regulating tests on animals and research based experiements that lead to the death and suffering of many animals. Being ethical and upholding ethical standards on the side of the reseachers will be a milestone effort in ensuring that the welfare and the lives of animals is respected and maintained.
More than one million sheep, dogs, guinea pigs, primates, hamsters, a...
Professor:
Class:
Date:
Should Scientists Test Products on Animals
Introduction
The use of animals in product testing and medical experimentation is an issue that has influenced debates among scholars and activists fighting for the welfare of animals. In these tests, animals are exposed to suffering through pain and fear. However, experiments and tests conducted by the scientists do not justify safety for the human beings. This is because many of the products that have been made and tested through the animals have not been effective among the people. It has been estimated that tens of millions of animals are used annually in projects and experiments that are funded by private entities and federal agencies. In addition, it is estimated that mice and rats account for 90% of the animals used in these projects and experiments. Different legislations have been enacted at states level to exclude the animals used in scientific projects. However, it is only the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), which sets requirements standards of housing, care, and treatment of animals used in the laboratories. This shows that many issues have been overlooked regarding how the scientists test products on animals. This essay is a discussion of why the scientists should not test products on animals.
Should Scientists Test Products on Animals
According to National Anti-Vivisection Society, toxicity tests in which the safety of chemicals and products is determined was established in the 20th century. This shows that continuation of testing products on animals as practiced by the scientists in the 21st century is a continuing traditional scientific practice. Experiments are conducted to detrmine the level of irritation caused by certain products and chemicals on the skin and the eyes of rabbits, mice, and rats in order to determine the potential effects on the human body. Statistics indicate that 50% of animals on which the products are tested die during the experiements (Kelch 121). The primitive scientist tests by the scientists including LD50 and the Draize tests are still conducted by the modern scientists. The practice of testing products on animals has therefore been a common practice. It is important for the scientists and researchers to develop alternative methods of testing products as a way of enhacing the welfare of animals.
It is unethical and morally wrong to test products on animals (Norman, Jackson and Rosenbaum 177). However, the government can allow the act on the condition that scientists recognize animals as living things with senses and therefore suffer from torture. Many products and devices that are are manufactured and sold to the consumers are subject to strict regulations by the government. The government agencies responsible for the regulations require that goods sold be safe to the people, environment, and the animals. As a result, it is a requirement that manufacturers should conduct toxicity tests on products before they distribution into the markets. This has exposed many animals to torture since specimen products are tested on them. Most advocates that fight for the rights of aninmals oppose vivisection on ethical grounds (Haynes 34). In this regard, they argue that it is morally wong to benefit one species at the expense of another. The life and the welfare of the animals is more important than scientific researches, most of which take many years before providing a useful product. In addition, some of scientific researchers use many financial and economic resources that can be used to improve the welfare of animals. Different states have different laws regulatig animal experimentation and hence companies can shift operations to different states depending on the areas where their operations are favored. In this regard, the laws regulating the test of products on animals should be clearly defined at the federal level to enhance safety of the animals. A federal legislation about test of products on animals would extend to all the states leading to significant changes on how scientific researches are conducted.
The government law making agencies should enact legislations that barn testing of products on animals (Kennedy Institute of Ethics F. Barbara Orlans Research Associate, Georgetown University 164). In addition, legislations should be enacted to restrict animal experiementation in search of products that imptrove human welfare. However, these legislations should give excemptions to researches conducted in the medical field. The main reason for such excemptions is the fact that animals are tortured in tests that have no significant value to the human beings. For instance, in the tests conducted for cosmetics, no much gain has been achieved. It is of no need to end the lives of animals for activities that add no value to the humans or nature. This depicts disrespect of life of the animals, which is against moral values of maintaining the natural environment. It is important to recognize that the life and the welfare of animals used in experiements and tests is important than the personal desires of the scientists. This means that tests of cosmetics on animals do not justify animal experimentation. It is only the congress that should be mandated to enact legislations that support animal experimentation and tests. Corporations that conduct research based on animal tests and experiements can however, shift operations from one state to another depending on the desired situations for their activities. In this regard, the law should be well defined to state the kind of researches intended. Well defined legislations will play a significant role in regulating tests on animals and research based experiements that lead to the death and suffering of many animals. Being ethical and upholding ethical standards on the side of the reseachers will be a milestone effort in ensuring that the welfare and the lives of animals is respected and maintained.
More than one million sheep, dogs, guinea pigs, primates, hamsters, a...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now: