The original essay entitled “Why live a life that is not life?” was written for an Advanced Placement Language and Composition course. The piece was written for a defense of a cause assignment wherein the author had to write an essay that convinced her readers that the cause was one they should support and agree with. The piece, though at points very well written, has many of the common flaws that appear with in persuasive writing such as an overuse of “I believe, my opinion is, and I think” statements, and not displaying more than one counterargument and a limited refutation to follow. The author can plainly state that yes, her own views did influence her writing of the original essay. She admits to having a tendency to have a very open …show more content…
Within this paragraph the author showcases many different aspects of figurative language which were not seen quite as profusely within the rest of the essay; therefore, the author loses some of her writing style by not adding a diverse amount of figurative language scattered throughout the essay. “Arguments appurtenant to euthanasia all stem from a wide range of opinions and from a wide range of ideals” (20-21) the author used “from a wide range” in repetition in order to present her readers with the many diverse viewpoints about euthanasia. Another use of figurative language would be the alliteration shown within the statement “die with dignity” (22) which goes along with the author’s thesis as to die with dignity would be to die when a person chooses to not after wasting away. Within this paragraph the author also uses a rhetorical question presented as “why live out a life of unrelieved and pointless suffering” which perfectly coincides with the thesis considering they are extremely similar. In her essay, she addresses the main argument against her thesis, the idea that all pain no matter how severe can be relieved. She refutes this argument by saying “the average percent of terminally ill patients who die from pain comes to about 55% overall” (27-28). Counterarguments and their refutations ultimately allow the author to gain support from readers by exposing the flaws that exist within the author’s main cause and reasoning. The use of figurative language and counterarguments garners an extensive amount of support for the argument as they both compliment and support the
In the song “Somebody I Used To Know” is about a guy who is heartbroken that his former lover is gone and out of his life. The lyrics “Make out like it never happened and that we are nothing” (metaphor) means that Gotye is still trying to get with Kimba and she denies everything they did together. If you really read through the lyrics you can connect on how he feels and how Kimba feels. One more lyric that really hit me was “Have your friends collect your records and then change your number”(figurative language) those lyrics mean that she wants nothing to do with Gotye but, he is trying to get her love back but she changed her number .
Poetry conveys emotions and ideas through words and lines. Long Way Down gives the story about a boy named Will, who wants to avenge his brother. He believes that a guy named Riggs killed his brother. He takes his brother’s gun and leaves his family’s apartment on the eighth floor. On the way down the elevator, he is stopped at each floor and a ghost from his past gets on.
There are three key audiences of the text for William F. May's “Rising to the Occasion of Our Death.” The first audience, in this case, would be legislative organizations or lawmakers who have researched and studied similar cases regarding euthanasia. Since May was as an ethics professor at Southern Methodist University, his tone is decidedly intellectual. An uneducated individual would find it more difficult to read his essay; for example, in declarations such as “Advocates of active euthanasia appeal to the principle of patient autonomy,” May's syntax and tone is formal, informative, and utilizes heavy technical jargon (May 662). In other words, it is authoritative, and enables the audience to view him as a credible source due to his syntactical confidence. Other organizations, lobbyists, or lawmakers who are researching evidence on euthanasia would certainly benefit from reading his expert opinion on the matter. Moreover, his desire to develop a “judicious, regulated policy” is a certain acknowledgement that he is attempting to legally call for regulations on euthanasia (May 662).
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
The issue at hand is whether physician-assisted suicide should be legalized for patients who are terminally ill and/or enduring prolonged suffering. In this debate, the choice of terms is central. The most common term, euthanasia, comes from the Greek words meaning "good death." Sidney Hook calls it "voluntary euthanasia," and Daniel C. Maguire calls it "death by choice," but John Leo calls it "cozy little homicides." Eileen Doyle points out the dangers of a popular term, "quality-of-life." The choice of terms may serve to conceal, or to enhance, the basic fact that euthanasia ends a human life. Different authors choose different terms, depending on which side of the issue they are defending.
Mortality is an ever-fleeting moment in time, yet some believe the spirit and soul is eternal. The desperation of perishing flesh painted in detail Dudley Randall’s poem “To The Mercy Killers.” The focused principally on the allying functions of a mortal body during a state of no recovery. Randall presents to an audience a plea for mercy, and for the continuous gift of life. Randall’s poem strikes as a sore spot within humanity, euthanasia. The choice to exercise a person’s right to euthanasia due to a medical condition or a personal choice seems to strike a sensitive spot within most human beings. The notion of playing GOD in a sense seems ridiculous to some yet others may view euthanasia as a personal right. Who is to say which personal view is correct? The purpose of this essay is to broaden and present alternative views in which euthanasia maybe appropriate.
...ow point drives him to consider death as an alternative to suffering. This chapter helps to highlight some present day themes about the ethical issues of euthanasia such as the difference between active and passive euthanasia. Also whether or not a medical professional should assist in the process and under what circumstances. Discussion about euthanasia will probably continue in the future. This character brings some of the issues to light.
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
Opposing Viewpoints."Introduction to Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints." Euthanasia. Ed. Carrie Snyder. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2000. Opposing Viewpoints. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 18 Nov. 2011. http://ic.galegroup.com.library.collin.edu/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Reference&disableHighlighting=false&prodId=OVIC&action=2&catId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ3010134107&userGroupName=txshracd2497&jsid=af2eacb374dfea6a89c0773d16c35a50
Anyone can be diagnosed with a terminal illness. It doesn’t matter how healthy you are, who you are, or what you do. Some terminal illnesses you can prevent by avoiding unhealthy habits, eating healthily, exercising regularly and keeping up with vaccinations. However some terminally ill people cannot be helped, their diseases cannot be cured and the only thing possible to help them, besides providing pain relieving medication, is to make them as comfortable as possible while enduring their condition. Many times the pharmaceuticals do not provide the desired pain escape, and cause patients to seek immediate relief in methods such as euthanasia. Euthanasia is the practice of deliberately ending a life in order to alleviate pain and suffering, but is deemed controversial because many various religions believe that their creators are the only ones that should decide when their life’s journey should reach its end. Euthanasia is performed by medical doctors or physicians and is the administration of a fatal dose of a suitable drug to the patient on his or her express request. Although the majority of American states oppose euthanasia, the practice would result in more good as opposed to harm. The patient who is receiving the euthanizing medication would be able to proactively choose their pursuit of happiness, alleviate themselves from all of the built up pain and suffering, relieve the burden they may feel they are upon their family, and die with dignity, which is the most ethical option for vegetative state and terminally ill patients. Euthanasia should remain an alternative to living a slow and painful life for those who are terminally ill, in a vegetative state or would like to end their life with dignity. In addition, t...
In order to provide a framework for my thesis statement on the morality of euthanasia, it is first necessary to define what euthanasia is and the different types of euthanasia. The term Euthanasia originates from the Greek term “eu”, meaning happy or good and “thanatos”, which means death, so the literal definition of the word Euthanasia can be translated to mean “good or happy death”.
Throughout history, poets had experimented with different forms of figurative language. Figurative language allows a poet to express his or her meaning within a poem. The beauty of using the various forms of figurative language is the ability to convey deep meaning in a condensed fashion. There are many different figures of speech that a poet can use such as: simile, paradox, metaphor, alliteration, and anaphora. These examples only represent a fraction of the different forms, but are amongst the most well-known. The use of anaphora in a poem, by a poet, is one of the best ways to apply weight or emphasis on a particular segment. Not only does an anaphora place emphasis, but it can also aid in setting the tone, or over all “feel” a reader receives from a poem. Poets such as Walt Whitman, Conrad Aiken, and Frances Osgood provide poems that show how the use of anaphora can effect unity, feeling, and structure of a poem.
Euthanasia is a sensitive topic and its sensitivity brings the world to a division. The two sides are those who support the issue and those who are not in favour. The side that supports the idea can argue that...
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their existence. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are for euthanasia. My thesis, just by looking at this issue from a logical standpoint, is that if someone is suffering, I believe they should be allowed the right to end their lives, either by their own consent or by someone with the proper authority to make the decision. No living being should leave this world in suffering. To go about obtaining my thesis, I will first present my opponents view on the issue. I will then provide a Utilitarian argument for euthanasia, and a Kantian argument for euthanasia. Both arguments will have an objection from my opponent, which will be followed by a counter-objection from my standpoint.
‘Mercy’, ‘dignity’, ‘good’ and ‘self-determination’ are the moral basis that the advocates for euthanasia defend. How appealing they sound, their accounts are simply an attempt to escape from dying process, through which we still hold our existence. The argument of pro-euthanasia might suggest that we are able to control over our life and death without moral conflict because such values related to euthanasia can justify the action of killing.