Subscription pricing
Ethicist: Some would ban cloning on the grounds that clones would be subpeople, existing to indulge the vanity of their "originals." It is not illegal, however, to use one person as a vehicle for the ambitions of another. ████ ██████ ████ █████ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████████ ██ ██████████ ███ ██ ███ ████ ██ ████ ████ ████ ██ █ ████ ████ ██ ██ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ ██████ ████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Other people argue that we should ban cloning because the clones would exist to indulge the vanity of the people from whom the clones are made. The author’s implicit conclusion is that this argument’s reasoning is flawed. The author supports this conclusion by showing that in other contexts that do not involve bans, people use others for their own selfish interests. Thus, the author implies, a ban on cloning can’t be justified merely because the clones are used by the original people.
Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is support for the implicit conclusion that the other people’s argument for banning cloning is not persuasive.
16.
The assertion that it is ███ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ██████ ██ █ ███████ ███ █████████ █████████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████
a
It supports the ██████████ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ █████ █████████████ ██ ████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ ███████ █████ ██ █████
b
It supports the ██████████ ████ ███████ ████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████████
c
It is implied ██ ███ ██████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ ██████████
d
It supports the ██████████ ████ ████ ████████ █████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ███ ████████
e
It describes a █████ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████████