Commentary #3

Commentary #4

The author’s thesis is that benefits to humans do not outweigh the violation of moral principles in practicing vivisection. I had to read the thesis statement a few times to get it because it seems to be worded a bit awkwardly. This may be something that needs to be fine-tuned for more clarity because the beginning of the intro is a quote from the bible stating that humans are superior to animals. The second paragraph supports the thesis through the assertion that humans are not superior to animals, thus making vivisection immoral. The first criterion the author uses to support his thesis is that, according to the theory of Darwinism, humans and animals are equal. This is supported with from scientific research. The only argument I can foresee is that Christianity rests on the belief that humans are descendants of Adam and Eve, not evolved apes. The evidence gives strength to his reason that animals should be treated equally because they are biologically related to us, and if human experimentation is wrong therefore vivisection is wrong as well.

The second reason the author gives to support his reason is based on U.S. legislation to protect animals from exploitation that causes pain. He cites a clause that dictates that “pain must be kept to a minimum” and gives examples of some experiments that are clearly painful to animals. The refutation notes a slippery slope where humans could become the subject of vivisection if things go too far and that the greater good should apply to all species. There are not any quotes or evidence to support his refutation, so he might find something to make it a bit more concrete. The conclusion is well written and restates the refutation of hierarchy with humans at the top of the chain.

The author’s criteria/ match arguments support his thesis well. I think he may want to touch on evidence that supports the claim that the animals experience significant pain and suffering while undergoing vivisection. As far as the opposing religious views he may want to note that and refute it by citing other values within Christianity (etc.) that would support the claim that vivisection is wrong… maybe do unto others or thou shall not kill? This might be where a skeptic refuses to accept his argument.