Topic sentences

Scientific Origins of Life

1. convincing because it is supported by empirical evidence.

2. convincing because it is consistent and unbiased.

3. convincing because it is realistic and fits with our experience of the world.

4. not convincing because it can't provide an absolute origin of life.

5. not convincing because it doesn't explain why we matter.

6. not convincing because it doesn't explain what our role in the world is.

7. not convincing because Scientific theories have been proven wrong in the past.

Religious Origins of Life

1. convincing because it explains how we came to be here.

2. convincing because it explains why we matter.

3. convincing because it explains what our role in the world is.

4. convincing because it explains it is the word of God, and it has stood the test of time.

5. not convincing because it is not supported by empirical evidence.

6. not convincing because it is self-contradictory.

7. not convincing because it is unrealistic.

Compatible Origins of Life

1. not compatible because the events took a different amount of time.

2. not compatible because they have different ideas about the importance of human life.

3. not compatible because they have different ideas about what caused life to be.

4. not compatible because they have different ideas about why life was caused to be.

5. not compatible because they are based on totally different types of evidence.

6. compatible because events occur in a similar order.

7. compatible because events took a similar amount of time.

8. compatible because one tells us about the development of life and the other tells us how the first life began.

9. compatible because one tells us "The how" and the other tells us "The why", as it gives us purposes.

Environmental

1. it risks underplaying individual autonomy or free will.

2. it would be unjust to the offender to not consider the environmental influences on them.

3. it risks labelling people who may be subject to these environmental influences.

4. it makes it challenging to know how harshly to punish an offender.

5. it makes it makes it harder to provide closure to the victims and their families.

psychological

1. it risks underplaying individual autonomy or free will.

2. it would be unjust to the offender to not consider the psychological factors influencing them.

3. it risks labelling people who may be subject to these environmental influences.

4. it makes it challenging to know how harshly to punish an offender.

5. it risks letting society off the hook for its actions.

deterrence

1. it is unfair on the offender.

2. it doesn't always work in practice.

3. it does not lead to meaningful change for the offender or society.

4. One moral issue is that humans shouldn't be used as a means to an end.

retribution

1. it doesn't lead to a meaningful change for the offender or society.

2. it is hypocritical. If an act is morally wrong, then the state should set an example by not performing it themselves.

3. it may lead to disproportionate forms of punishment.

4. not seeking retribution leaves the victim and their family with no closure.

protection

1. it may only provide a short-term solution to crime.

2. is that it may lead to recidivism.

3. it may infringe on a person's human rights.

4. it does not solve the root causes of crime.

reform

1. they are too lenient on the offender.

2. it fails to priorities the needs of the victim and the victim's family.

3. it implies that crime is the result of a person's environment rather than their own choices.

4. it could be considered as indoctrination.

Religious Origins of Life

1. convincing because it explains how we came to be here.

2. convincing because it explains why we matter.

3. convincing because it explains what our role in the world is.

4. convincing because it explains it is the word of God, and it has stood the test of time.

5. not convincing because it is not supported by empirical evidence.

6. not convincing because it is self-contradictory.

7. not convincing because it is unrealistic.

Scientific Origins of Life

1. convincing because it is supported by empirical evidence.

2. convincing because it is consistent and unbiased.

3. convincing because it is realistic and fits with our experience of the world.

4. not convincing because it can't provide an absolute origin of life.

5. not convincing because it doesn't explain why we matter.

6. not convincing because it doesn't explain what our role in the world is.

7. not convincing because Scientific theories have been proven wrong in the past.

Compatible Origins of Life

1. not compatible because they explain how the universe came to be the way it is in a different way

2. not compatible because events took a different amount of time

3. not compatible because different ideas about what caused the unvierse to be\

4. not compatible because based on totally different type of evidence

5. not compatible because thye have diferent ideas baout the importance of some features of the unvierse

6. compatible because events occur in a similar oder

7. compatible because events took a similar amount of time

8. compatible because one tells the development of the unverse the other tells how the unverse began

9. compatible because one tells us the how the other tells us the why