Logic and Reasoning

The Case against `The Case against Perfection Michael Sandels essay The Case against Perfection (The Atlantic Monthly April , 2004 ) is basically a stand that opposes the idea of genetic enhancement primarily via cloning . Sandels places forward his idea of what is wrong with genetic engineering . He admitted its benefits , but he also tried to show how bad it could be allow cloning and genetic engineering . Sandels starts with a thesis that states his stand over the subject matter . His choice of words even in the first sentence alone shows his opposition to

the idea of using genetic engineering to enhance the next generation offspring of a couple

Throughout the text , the readers find Sandels pondering on perspetive of the advocates of genetic engineering , talking about the possibilities of the technology and then giving the possible good effects that the development of the technology might bring . He then talks about the how the different popular issues against genetic engineering may be invalid He defends the stand of genetic engineers , but not to really defend it but only to show why some reasons some parties are against it are not valid at all . Then , he would present the case which he believes is the more valid reason why genetic engineering should not be used to enhance the future generations

Sandels attacks the issue by presenting its different facets using analogies and logical reasoning . Even a s he ended the essay , he quoted what he must have believed to be the stronges and the most tempting reasons why genetic engineering should be given a chance to be used to enhance future generations - perfect muscles , right height intelligence , and freedom from diseases . Yet , like in the other paragraphs , Sandels only refuted the idea of genetic engineering however , his he failed to lay in details his counter against the satnd of the last author he quoted

In his attempt to show all the sides of the issue to avoid being biased , Sandels showed clearly how the idea of the advocates of genetic engineering works . But most of the time , he is unable to discuss clearly why the idea of the advocates he mention the different parts of the essay are wrong . In some cases , he had problems with reasoning

Let us start with the first issue he raised in the first paragraph . The last part of the paragraph sounds strong , but there are flaws in his reasoning

In liberal societies they reach first for the language of autonomy fairness , and individual rights . But this part of our moral vocabulary is ill equipped to address the hardest questions posed by genetic engineering

This reasoning is like an ad hominem , only , it does not attack the speaker but the words which encompass the basis of the liberal societies in advocating genetic engineering . In ad hominem , the argument attacks the speaker rather than the reason , but here the words autonomy fairness , and individual rights ' appear to be the sources f the argument and are the ones being attacked...