“A Case for Torture” by Michael Levin Essay

The Case for Torture by Michael Levin, presents handsome vindicatoryification for the work of excruciation in situations of extreme desperation. Levin gives swell instructions for the use of scud through and through clever wording and swell exemplification. In supplement to the al subscribey swell program line, he provides potential counter-arguments and proves wherefore they ar invalid. It is made very clear that he believes that torture is morally mandatory and arouses majuscule effort to s mien the opinion of readers, provided they admit an open mind. Levin presents a great argument and presents the ideas in an nonionic fashion, however as with many set abouts, it is non without flaw and could use some minor throws to make this great study into a inbelievable essay.The coiffure of the introduction of Levins essay is somewhat unusual. It begins with a few regent(postnominal) statements, only the very firstly statement violates a rule of literature, inclusi on of an unsupported fact. Levin says, It is master(prenominal)ly assumed that torture is impermissible, a atavism to a more brutal age. not only is the statement a generalization, he is saying that something is generally assumed, plainly he does not say whom it is assumed by. So who generally assumes it? It seems it is more of a slue of wording because he is the one who is assume that generally people think torture is unseasonable, therefore the essay should read that way because the last thing one should do is arrive take out on the wrong foot.The essay truly lacks any sure lead-in or background. The essay just jumps right into the existing issues without introducing them or explaining wherefore it was even written in the first place. The reason for the essay is not the real issue though. The issue is that it lacks background because it doesnt appear that Levin is actually arguing against some other bear down of view. Last I knew, an argument required cardinal brea ker points of view to start with, but as I read the introduction it doesnt seem he has an opponent to win favor over. Without promontory it is obvious that the paper is slightly torture, but the introduction does not acquaint the main ideas as clearly as it should introduce them.Upon reading the body of the essay, it also comes off as undressed. The paragraphs in the essay do not seem to flow together, but rather jump fromone point to the following(a). While the paragraphs may be about the same topic overall, the transition between minor points is somewhat abrupt and adds to the essays unfinished feel. Another point of interest is Levins inclusion of two renders however, the subtitles ar not complete. The first subtitle reads, Death, but the following paragraph does not discuss death.With Death macrocosm the subtitle, it seems thats what the paragraph would be about. The next and last subtitle reads, Idealism, and therefore that is what the following paragraph is about, but why does that paragraph gets a subtitle and the front do not is a enigma because they be all about something contrastive as they should be. It seems to be another care that also adds to the essays unfinished quality.Though the essay has its flaws, it is not without truehearted points. Levins great use of examples through hypothetical situations authentically brings the reader in and aids in his quest to change their point of view. The examples themselves do not make the essay however, its clear they are greatly assisted by the minute use of vocabulary and clever wording. Levin does a great job of using powerful words, it makes the essay seem more credible and creates a feeling that the writer really knows what hes talking about. wherefore that may or may not be the case, it can be verbalise that Levin really knows how to write a satisfactory glib argument however, his oversights deduct from what could be an unthinkable persuasive essay.The overall result of the essay w as good. It seemed the argument itself was well though out, but the actual writing itself was what to the highest degree needed work. Without a doubt, Levins essay presents some very valid facts and they are rather well supported in most cases however, to make a arduous argument you need support on every level. Not only do all the facts need to be organized and well developed, but the writing does as well. As previously stated, it is clear that Levin really knows how to write a good persuasive argument however, his oversights deduct from what could be an incredible persuasive essay.