@BethanyAndy I agree with you, Bethany. Especially with the college scandal we had earlier this year, makes students consider whats really worth it anymore
@BethanyAndy Yes, I agree that the articles show a lot of appeals of pathos. They use these emotions to capture the audience by making them feel sympathy towards people who are affected in the case.
@valeeria_ruiz Yes, I wrote about how unfair the process is for most students. They feel helpless, and only want the guidance that schools should be providing fo them
In Jemmott's article, it was sad reading about how some schools don't provide the help to their students when it comes to college application process. Not only does this make students feel helpless, but they would be missing out on the opportunities college has to offer #RHUB100
In class, after doing activities on different rhetorical strategies in class, I found that is was a lot easier for me to understand and view Zamzow's article, and know her specific claims and reasoning. I understood in the end, her goals and intentions of her piece. #RHUB100
When we're taught about the many assumptions of different people's arguments, claims and views, some may not understand the reasoning behind it, however, we must respect their views, and understand what they're trying to point out with their argument to certain audience. #RHUB100
@Stephan89958954 I love that you agree with both arguments! However I'm more towards Sandel's claim because I believe that humans should have an appreciation for the gifted quality of life that is offered to us, since we cannot control genetics or our own inheritance. #RHUB100
@BethanyAndy Yes, I very much so agree with your opinion. I also agree with Sandel, it is not a great benefit to society, however we shouldn't judge/stop someone who wants to actually do it.
In my opinion towards designer babies and genetic engineering, both Sandel and Harris provide great claims, however I agree with Sandel. He agrees that creating designing babies is morally wrong, and has many negative impacts to society, whereas Harris believes it can benefit us.
In my opinion towards designer babies and genetic engineering, both Sandel and Harris provide great claims, however I agree with Sandel. He agrees that creating designing babies is morally wrong, and has many negative impacts to society, whereas Harris believes it can benefit us.
@BTearse Yes, Bela. I agree with your statement. You can truly never mess with nature and the process, since we aren't able to control what happens. We just need to let nature do its thing.
@RuaneMadeleine I agree with you Madeleine! I really feel that the author put a lot of good, valid reasoning and letting us know about the possible outcomes of genetically engineering children. #RHUB100
In Sandel’s article, “The Case Against Perfection”, I agree with his statement that technology has really improved our society and has left a positive impact to mankind, however, it has also left an increased dependability on humans, making our life sedentary. #RHUB100
I respect J.Harris for mentioning all the different possible points towards the topic of genetic modification. He provides the claim arguing that these enhancements should provide the equal opportunities, and an opportunity to improve with the modern day tools we have. #RHUB100
After reading the article in class, it is very unknown how genetically modifying babies will affect the gene pool. The genes often have more than one use, so altering a gene could have adverse or even fatal effects, affecting the babies. #RHUB100
@AshlynFernand14 I definitely agree with your comment. I think there are definitely pros and cons when it comes to this topic. For example a pro would be it could help keep up with modern technology, but a con can be the ethical and moral issues. You can go either way.