Skip to content

Blog 4

October 18, 2012

All of my classes this semester are not courses that spark debate, so instead I will be refer back to my Environmental Science course I took last year in high school. A large debate that is still widely discussed is the subject of overpopulation of the Earth. Overpopulation occurs when the population of a species, in this case humans, exceed the proper carrying capacity that the Earth can provide while having enough resources for everyone. It has been projected that the carrying capacity of the Earth for humans is about 16 billion. The fact that we are already at 7 billion and increasing rapidly, overpopulation is a very large concern. One debate we had was regarding whether or not wealthy and industrialized countries should share their advancements of medicine with poor countries and help them survive even though poor countries are the countries that are contributing the most to overpopulation. The most prominent thesis is that medicine should be shared with everyone as it would be immoral to let someone die even though they can be saved easily with the advancements we have.

Writing an antithesis can easily be done in this situation without having prior knowledge or having to do research. The antithesis would be that we should not share medicine with poor countries because overpopulation is a major issue and helping poor countries survive would only result in more children thus more overpopulating. An antithesis is merely the opposite of the thesis, so no research would have to be done. However, it would not be possible to support the antithesis without having to do research into the subject. To develop a good antithetical argument, research would have to be done in order to find support for the antithesis or find support that proves the thesis to be wrong. If I were to write about this subject, I would find support for both arguments and then decide which point is the strongest.

Advertisements

From → Uncategorized

One Comment
  1. Hey Quresh,
    After reading your blog post, I was left debating which is the right thing to do.
    After thinking to myself for a while, I agree with your prominent thesis that medicene should be shared with everyone as it would be immoral to let someone die even though they can be saved.
    In my opinion, I dont think the population will hit 16billion, simply because of mother nature. I believe natural disasters, new epidemics and diseases, and wars will take place and bring the population to an equilibrium!
    Anyways, I just wanted to share my thoughts with you.
    Btw, I thought your thesis and antithesis were both great.

    -Charlie Park

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: