Project Reflection

Now that I have analyzed both sides of my topic more deeply, my perspective has shifted in that I
can now understand the argument against my bias of being a proponent of the legalization of assisted
suicide, and categorize its main rhetorical appeal. The argument opposing the legalization of assisted
suicide was exposed to me to a great extent during this project, and its reasonings mostly included those
appealing to a more spiritual, traditional base of values. These are in themselves respectable even if they
do contrast with my own socially liberal views in that they take into account the valuation of life itself,
and adhere to respect regarding religious beliefs. In this same sense I have been able to categorize a
highly pathos based use of rhetoric in these viewpoints, which is most likely why I tend to disagree with
the points being made as I am a very logical thinker. This extensive research has further permitted me to
delineate between what drives conservative and liberal viewpoints perhaps in general, and it can all be
attributed to a large base of knowledge concerning this debate that I gleaned from my research prior to
writing this essay.
This correlates to a revelation which this project presented me with in terms of my own values.
As stated, I tend to be a logical thinker, and categorizing the type of rhetoric which each side of the
arguments surrounding my topic is based upon led me to analyze why my preferences sided with the
proponents side of this argument. It was evident that as this is more a logos based perspective (as
evidenced by its emphasis of avoiding pain and the most effective ways to do so), that I tended myself to
be more prone to attributing innate value to logical ways of reasoning. I had been able to analyze this
previous to this project, however my inclinations to logical thinking were clarified greatly during my
more recent research.
Concerning the values of the opponents side of my argument, as aforementioned, I learned
during my research in this project that the viewpoint of this topic is based primarily on pathos appeal.
This is evidenced by this sides bias towards the innate value of life and the traditional views on the
spirituality of being alive, something which I associate with conservative views but was not able to
specifically apply to the anti-physician assisted suicide argument until this project.
During this project I learned that democracy induces the polarization of ideologies relating to a
given subject. Especially concerning this topic, the opposing viewpoints which I researched were so
dissimilar and so vehemently distasteful of one another that it made me realize how a bid for recognition
in a democratic society, in which there is always a chance that ones own ideology will become law,
produces a rhetoric which divides and examines the differences between any two viewpoints on a matter.
My political views have changed over the course of this project in that I am now pro-physician
assisted suicide to a degree which includes not only providing this option for the terminally ill, but for
anyone desirous of an easy transition from life to death. Prior to this project, I had only scrutinized my
own views on my chosen subject to the degree of being generally pro-physician assisted suicide. This
was evident in the first draft of my essay, when Jessica aptly pointed out that I did not specify my views
on assisted suicide as it extended to the mentally ill or anyone else, and I discovered upon configuring my
views that I feel strongly concerning the option of access to controlled methods of suicide for all.