Running head: ARGUMENT ANALYSIS

Argument Analysis

ARGUMENT ANALYSIS

2
Argument Analysis

Can you imagine what the world would be like without medicine? What would the world
be like without disease? It is hard to imagine a world without medicine or even disease because
both have been around for eons in some form. Disease is unbiased, may be found everywhere in
the world, and has a history record as long as the eye can see, and it has found a way to evolve
along with the rest of us. Medication also has evolved through time and has cured or assisted
many individuals in healing, but at what cost! While the author did provide a plethora of data to
support animal testing, the article was not as convincing as it could of have been, because she did
not provide enough expert data and information for the opposing side, and it lacked unbiased
claims.
Sun (2012) wants people to believe testing animals to find treatments and cures is the
only effective way to obtain these results. Her purpose is to convince readers that the most
effective way to obtain effective medications and treatments are through animal testing. She
provides information from both sides of the argument to convince reader; however, I believe she
is only providing some information to convince her audience. This writers main audience is the
general public because it is written simply so anyone from a basic educational background can
understand her purpose. The author did not provide significant data, statistics, or other
information that may be more beneficial to researchers or professionals. In this essay I believe
the author achieved her goal in convincing most readers who may not be knowledgeable on this
topic. Others who may be more knowledgeable about the subject may find this article not as
convincing. A more knowledgeable person in the subject will look for detailed information
pertaining to opposing claims, such as what evidence or claims animal activists have that refute
animal testing.

ARGUMENT ANALYSIS

This article has several appeals pertaining to logos, ethos, and pathos. Throughout her
article she uses information simplistically enough to reach her reader which provides a tone like
a casual conversation. For example, she starts the article by acknowledging a medical doctor.
known for his Nobel Prize for organ transplant research. She also provides a quote from him:
None of this could have been done without animal experimentation. It is a tragedy and a waste
of resources that scientists have to combat the anti-vivisectionists (Sun, 2012, p. 83). As she is a
high school student, she is not an expert, but provides sufficient evidence in presenting her topic.
She provides several references of factual data on the advantages and disadvantages. For
example, she states that the USDA surveyed all the animals being used for research and that
only six percent experienced pain (p. 83). Although the article was published in a scholarly
journal, I do not consider it fully credible, because the information presented is still one sided.
For example, she provided several examples of how animal testing has been beneficial but only
gave one example of alternative testing, and did not provide sufficient data or information about
alternative testing. She also did not provide any information or reports on facilities that do not
abide by these rules. She did well by addressing the pros and cons but did not provide equal
representation of both sides. She addressed only one center claim, and even refuted it, within that
section, indicating that using tissue samples only tested a certain type of tissue, and that
computer modeling was based on assumptions. Not once did she argue within the advantages
section or provide any information that these advantages could be refuted. Another example of
this can be found in the opposition section of her article where she provided a biased view of the
opposition, which actually focused on the organizations supposedly regulating the facilities to
ensure proper treatment of the animals. She could have included data or a few quotes from the
animal activists organizations that conflict with the data from the other organizations. Including

ARGUMENT ANALYSIS

valid arguments and data would have presented claims from both sides so the reader could make
a decision on whether the data supports animal testing or not.
In this article the quality and supporting details are slightly one-sided but Sun did provide
some statistics, examples, and testimonies. She provided several facts pertaining to both views
that were from the U.S. Department of Agriculture stating that the organization has strict
regulations for animal testing and the surveys performed provided results that only six percent of
animals experienced pain (Sun, 2012). Sun also provided information pertaining to individuals
who contributed to the most famous medical advancements in history, such as the vaccines for
cholera and anthrax developed by Pasteur and Chamberland. This information Sun used
strengthened her logos because it provides hard facts on how animal testing has been beneficial
to curing some severe illness and plagues. Sun also provided two examples of alternative testing,
such as tissue and computer modeling, but did not provide evidence supporting alternatives for
the opposition as she did in supporting animal testing. Although she provided examples, one or
two statistics, and several quotes from expert sources supporting animal testing, she did not
provide any arguments or conflicting information toward supporting animal testing. For
example, when she stated that the U.S. Department of Agriculture conducted a survey about
whether animals experienced pain, there was no information about what facilities were surveyed.
This paper would have stronger logos, if, counter information was given, such as statistical
information about the number of facilities that do not abide by the strict regulations of animal
testing. Sun could have presented more information about reports from some animal activists
organizations. This would have provided the reader more opposing information so readers could
make their decision on where they stand. She presented her article with just enough information

ARGUMENT ANALYSIS
for individuals to get a basic idea of both sides, but convinced her readers by providing more
information supporting animal testing.

ARGUMENT ANALYSIS

6
Reference

Sun, S. (2012). The truth behind animal testing. Young Scientists Joural, 5(12), 83-85.
doi:10.4103/0974-6102.105076