Genetic modification, or engineering, has been debated for some time now, with many opposing it on grounds of genomic risks and genetic issues. 'autonomy. Both Powell and Blackford support genetic modification, and each speaks out for one of two reasons listed. Powell explains that the gains outweigh the risks, and Blackford asserts that there is no need to worry about the autonomy of genetically modified children. Powell's article is the superior article, stating facts, citing scientific theories, and using logical appeals to the reader. Blackford, on the other hand, focuses solely on the morality of such change using a small combination of facts, psychology, and environmental factors, and engages the reader's emotions. The use of genetic modification “improves human well-being,” rather than relying on evolution, acts as the primary focus of Powell’s article. A quote from evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is then used to compare evolution to that of a "blind watchmaker", in that natural selection does not care about life or its quality. He then goes on to argue that evolution as a whole does not tend toward progress, but only toward survival, and that such a natural system should not limit humanity. Having these facts and a credible quote under his belt, Powell then explains why genetic modification would free humanity from the chains of natural selection and increase humanity's livelihood. To do this, he uses a multitude of facts, scientific theories like evolution and natural selection, and through this he applies a logical appeal to better approach it as a scientific article. With a narrower focus and reasoning than Powell's article, Blackford's article only addresses the morality of genetic manipulation of a child and...... middle of paper ...more helpful than Blackford's article. He had much more data to support his thesis and a wide range of reasons for why genetic engineering would improve the quality of human life. Blackford's, on the other hand, achieved what the author intended, to say that a child's autonomy is not affected by genetic modification. Powell's article would be very useful to other researchers because of its facts, scientific theories, logical arguments, citations, and sources. Works Cited Powell, Russell, PhD, and Allen Buchanan, PhD. “Journal of Medicine and Philosophy.” Breaking the chains of evolution: the prospect of deliberate genetic modification in humans. Np, June 17, 2011. Web. March 28, 2014. Blackford, Russell, Prof. “Autonomy and moral virtue of genetically modified people.” » Politics and Life Sciences 29.1 (2010): 82-84. EBSCO. Internet. March 28. 2014.