Identify the principal issue presented by the source.
Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
Do you find the source credible? Explain your reasoning.
Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
State one argument made by the author.
Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Is the author's argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this.
Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com December 20, 2018, 12:46 am ad1c9bdddf
Please allow some of my ideas to assist:
As you identify the principal issue presented by the source, you might add that it embodies how global approval for euthanasia is increasing. The author argues for the legalization of Euthanasia.
Since the author obviously is biased for the legalization of Euthanasia, some biased statements occur such as "At the time of writing, new efforts are being made to find legal loopholes to thwart the will of the people." How can the author speak for all people in one country?
Some areas where vague or ambiguous wording might be when the author cites global cases such as "In other words, passive voluntary euthanasia can be tolerated under certain circumstances." The "under certain circumstances part" is fairly ambiguous.
Article ideas are given.