response to:
(1) Have science and technology been a net force for good or bad? What limits, if any, should there be on scientific or technological progress and/or should any topics be off limits to science and technology… divide this paper into two Parts.. *part 1(~500-600 words) :Choose a position on the issue of your chosen topic, and then put yourself in the mind of an advocate of or critic of that position. Your goal is to present the most convincing case you can in favor of that person’s position by considering how that person would argue for or against the position you choose.
Whatever position you choose (a) clearly state what that position is (b) thoroughly describe the issue. This will include what the issue is, what it is called, why it is a problem, etc. This is the most important part of your answer (and it is the reason part 1 is longer than part 2; no reason to make you re-explain the same issue). It is more important that you understand the issue than that you resolve it! Finally, (c) present what you consider to be the strongest argument(s) or reasons in favor of that position and explain why you consider those argument(s) or reasons the strongest… and *Part 2 (Playing Devil’s Advocate) (~500 words) :present what you consider to be the strongest objections and weaknesses against to
position you present in Part 1 and/or the most convincing alternative to that position.
You should think of this as a discussion between two friends who are trying to constructively come to a mutual understanding. Your objective is thus to present the most compelling case for and against the same position without deliberately misrepresenting the alternative view or being unnecessarily polemical.
