Respond to one of your colleague’s working-draft arguments, found on your group’s “Arguments for Essay 1” discussion board, by 1) suggesting at least one, alternative form of support, and 2) kindly challenging their argument with a counter argument.
I WILL PROVIDE THE DISCUSSION BELOW TO RESPOND TO:
While I am not certain this will be my final argument, I believe that Singer’s overarching principle that all individual animals should be treated as we do humans, supported by his example regarding medical testing on either a human imbecile or a dog, is refuted by Sagoff in his argument that this viewpoint does not leave room for necessary sacrifice to save many. Animal liberationists, which Singer is classified as by Sagoff, are unwilling to compromise the life of one creature to “preserve the authenticity, integrity and complexity of ecological systems” (Sagoff III). Most of the true suffering that animals undergo is within nature, and this fact cannot realistically be altered, nor done in a way that is not wholly detrimental to the larger ecosystems within the natural environment.
I WILL ALSO PROVIDE THE READINGS BASED ON THE DISCUSSION SO YOU CAN GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING.
FORMAT THE RESPONSE BY PUTTING 1) THEN suggesting at least one, alternative form of support. AND AFTER WRITE 2) AND kindly challenge their argument with a counter argument.