Bioethics Case Study

1714 Words null Page
The resolve for the Bioethics’ category is “Is it ok for doctor to help in assisted suicide?” The affirmative team presented by Dan Simmons and Danielle Eustace. The negative team presented by Andon Ware and Austin Railey III. The affirmative team and negative team both did a pretty great job on the topic beside a little controversial comment during the question and answers. However, their research were both valid and support their resolve well. I believe the affirmative team won this debate. I believed the affirmative team got the win for this debate because they were point out some strong elements. At the beginning of the speech portion, Danielle stated out key elements such as people fear the unknown, dignity, and terminal illness. Those …show more content…
The negative presented by Marcus Tupuola and Spencer Duncan. This debate was slightly confusing in my opinion, both team was having problem to present their information fully and effectively. Both team show some confusing of their part upon the debate, and have quite lots of time remain on their turn, for example the negative team was nervous and asked how much time they have left, which can potentially cost them their efficiency. I selected the affirmative team to win this debate because they maintained to support the supply and demand concept better than the negative team. The affirmative team claims that the current method is helping the industry to provide faster food supply, they made a claim on growth of demand and in need to respond in supply. The negative team did not cover much on the supply and demand like the affirmative, they mainly focused on the moral ethics on slaughtering animal and why it can caused diseases. The negative team’s ideal is not invalid, however, they did not focus on the main resolve (supply/demand). In the question and answer portion, both teams were not asking quality question to support the resolve. Instead, there were lots of personal question such as where do you for grocery, or would people paying higher price for organic food. This portion is definitely the weakness for both team in the debate, no strong sign of addressed the main concept (supply/demand). In the rebuttal, the affirmative got the right ideal by stating how important supply/demand is for the industry, and how business would do what best to maintain that, and also, the people are still paying for what they can afford. The negative did not make any claim on supply/demand, although they provide statistic of survey on people, but that would not

Related Documents