Running Head: The Believing Game 1 The Believing Game 2

Running Head The Believing Game 1the Believing Game 2th

The believing game is an activity carried out to try and explain what is likely going to make an individual believe a certain thing to be true. When people are subjected to different situations or text, they are likely to behave differently towards the issue. Some will have to argue before they can be confident about the text that has been subjected to them. Others will get mad if the text does not favor their interests while another group will just retreat and will not argue. The believing game helps a person to have the writer’s point of view and hence understanding the reasons for writing down the text (Corrigan, 2012). In believing games, you agree with the writer all through so that a better understanding of the text can be gotten. In the believing game, critical thinking is crucial to help come up with the most appropriate decisions in where opinions conflict. Critical thinking involves profound and keen analysis and evaluation with the text before a judgment can be made.

The Believing game is important in making sure that key decisions are made in difficult situations (Bradford, 2011).

Part II In this case, I choose the topic; should animals be used for scientific or commercial testing? It has been found out that over twenty-six million animals are used all over the world to test the level of toxins in drugs before they can be administered into human beings (Coster, 2011). Some people argue that this process is right and allowed while others are against the practice. According to me, this process is cruel and should not be done on animals. This is inhuman, and the drugs that have passed animal tests must not be safe for human consumption. Additionally, this process is outdated because there are current procedures that can be used to test the level of toxins in drugs before they can be administered to humans.

However, some people advocate for the use of animals in scientific and commercial testing. They support this activity with some reasons; first, they claim that animal testing has helped in the discovery of many life-saving medicines. They also claim that there are no adequate ways yet that can be used to conduct the side effects of using a drug on the whole body. They are also for the reason that animals resemble human beings in many aspects and therefore are the best specimens for testing. They also claim that it is ethically wrong to use human beings to test drugs, leaving them with no alternatives but to use animals to test. They also believe that an animal is likely to benefit from the drug that has been used on it. The short lifespan of animals also makes them more vulnerable to drug testing (Corrigan, 2012). The reasons that support the use of animals in scientific and commercial testing can be looked into more deeply for evaluation. For instance, the reason that animal testing has contributed to the discovery many life-saving cures is true of help because animals have been used in the past to come up with great innovations on various medicines (Coster, 2011).

This reason may be true if only the animals used to carry out the tests are those that are in the last cycles of their life and are going to die soon. Another reason is that there are no alternatives to the testing on the whole body system. This can be helpful whereby the drug may have effects on other parts of the body apart from the affected area. If the whole body is needed for the testing of a drug, then an animal will become the most appropriate thing to use. Also, the hormones and organs in animals resemble those on animals closely (Coster, 2011). Making animals more vulnerable to the tests. The last reason is that the animals also benefit from the testing. This is useful because it can help prevent the death of animals from diseases that have not been diagnosed with them but affect both humans and animals. This type of testing allows animals to benefit from the drugs administered to them by boosting their immune system (Coster, 2011). This way animals will be less vulnerable to diseases that might be transmitted from human beings into animals.

References

• Corrigan, E. (2012). The believing game. New York: Scholastic.
• Coster, P. (2011). Animal testing. London: Wayland.
• Bradford, B. (2011). Playing the game. Thorndike Mane: Center Point Publishing.