Analysis of Putnams Claim - Essay Example

1 Identify Putnam's claim. Where does he it in his essay From your experience, do you agree with him Do you agree that people discuss "divorce" in an almost pious reverence saved only for life threatening illness Putnam claims even though he did go through the same trepidations as any child of divorced parents do; he did not miss out on things that children need the most. This is clearly stated in the first sentence of the fourth paragraph of his essay where he wrote that: "Perhaps one of the most important reasons for my absence of "trauma" (for lack of better word) stemming from my parent's divorce is that I am by no means alone in my trials and tribulation." I do believe that people still talk of divorce "in an almost pious reverence", but this I believe is bound to change since divorce is continuously becoming so common. The time will come when divorce will be talked about openly and sadly will be seen as a normal day-to-day happening in society. 2.) On what ground does Putnam base his claim Find specific evidence he presents to support his claim. Do you find it convincing and supportive Putnam based his claims on the fact that he feels he still can depend on his parents although he gets to spend time with them separately. He has found resolution in his family's situation of which he has quaintly expressed when he wrote that "The safest environment for me was to be with one happy parent at a time, instead of two miserable ones all the time." I find the discussions in his essay convincing and supportive on his claim on what the divorce of his parents has done for him. He was able to present negative implications of the divorce and at the same time presented a clear understanding and acceptance of his living situation "with two houses to call home." 4.) Putnam has several warrants, some of them stated explicitly and some implied. In paragraph 2 he states: "A loving parent will be a successful one even if he or she cannot afford to furnish his or her child with the best clothes or the most sophisticated gourmet delicacies." Do you agree with this warrant On what commonly shared values or beliefs does he base this warrant Are there any aspects of his warrant with which you disagree What backing does Putnam provide to support his warrant Is it sufficient I agree with Putnam's warrant that: "A loving parent will be a successful one even if he or she cannot afford to furnish his or her child with the best clothes or the most sophisticated gourmet delicacies." It is of a commonly shared belief or value that a parent's love and care is enough or sufficient to satisfy a child's happiness and well-being. Material vanity is of no importance when children lack of genuine attention, love and care. His claim is supported by his statement that: "With love as a driving force in a parent's mind, he or she will invariably make the correct decisions." In his opinion, he writes that the decision of his parents to separate after discovering that they no longer loved each other produced a healthy living situation for Putnam when he spends time with a happy parent at each time instead of living together with unhappy parents. 6.) Notice the qualifier Putnam uses in paragraph 3 when he says, "In all truthfulness, there have been some decidedly negative ramifications stemming from our family separation" (emphasis added). What limitations does this qualifying statement put on his argument Does this limitation weaken his argument at all The qualifying statement on paragraph 3 limits his argument because it opens to the whole other side of his claim. This statement stresses on the fact that his parent's divorce had a negative impact in his life. Although it limits his claim, it does not weaken his argument. It only shows of his acceptance and that he is not on denial of what he felt or seen as a child of divorced parents. 7.) Does Putnam acknowledge and address anticipated rebuttals to his argument Can you locate any in his essay What rebuttals can you make in response to his arguments Putnam does acknowledge and address anticipated rebuttals to his argument when he wrote that "As I reread the first section of this essay, I realize that it is perhaps too optimistic and cheerful regarding my life as a child of divorced parents." However I can make no rebuttals in response to his arguments because this essay is of his life and experiences. It only implies that what divorce for him may or may not be the same for others. "Merck pitches another use for Gardasil" http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/16/news/fortune500/merck/index.htm Claim 1 Merck claims that Gardasil, besides being an experimental cervical cancer vaccine can also prevent sexually transmitted viruses that cause symptoms such as external genital lesions in women like vagina and vulvar lesions. This vaccine was tested on female subjects worldwide before it was approved by the FDA and in late-stage tests that were conducted, it showed 100% efficiency in preventing STD viruses that cause 90% of vaginal and vulvar lesions in women. Claim 2 Merck vaccines' president claims that Gradasil is "a major breakthrough in cancer protection" and a great help to the expansion in the vaccine market in the future. For cervical cancer alone, about 3,900 women die annually in the US. Currently, the company is awaiting approvals on two vaccines; Rotateq and Zostavax which are for severe diarrhea in infants and shingles respectively. Claim 3 As Merck faces lawsuits, layoffs and the upcoming patent expiration of its top earner, Zocor, Gardasil will probably be one of the company products that will help them stop the company's downfall. Zocor's patent expiration is due in a year. Merck has resolved to cutting off jobs, closing and selling of some of its plants to replace lost sales with the impending expiration of Zocor's patent. Merck is also facing 9,200 costly lawsuits from those who blame Vioxx, an arthritis pain reliever for heart attacks. Read More