On Tuesday, December first, 2015 scientists from around the world assembled to discuss the ethical aspects of human genetic engineering and the future of the assisted reproduction field.  Molly Jackson, author of "Has gene editing gone too far? Ethical boundaries debated at historic summit," educates the reader on the current status of human genetic engineering.  The two methods of engineering on which she focuses most highly are DNA alterations of a single embryo and germline editing of hereditary reproductive cells.  Jackson uses the support of highly reliable sources throughout the article, which makes her argument much more convincing. Aristotle uses the word ethos to describe this method of establishing credibility to increase persuasive ability.  In the article, Jackson also discusses the current debate and popular attitude regarding human genetic engineering.  From screening an embryo in hopes of eliminating hereditary diseases to altering an individual's genes and physical characteristics, one thing remains clear: opening the door to genetic modification will change the world forever.  Through the reference of distinguished authority figures and the use of scientific language and research, Jackson uses the technique of ethos to effectively convince the reader of the current opinions and potential concerns of human genetic engineering.

 Throughout the entire article, Molly Jackson establishes her validity by using the support of respected and reliable sources. By mentioning the international summit debate for which scientists from around the world are coming to discuss the issue of genetic modification, Jackson gives the reader the notion that the information in this article is going to be legitimate and reliable.  She also lets the reader know that she is up to date on her information and well informed.  Soon after, Jackson quotes Nobel laureate David Baltimore, of the California Institute of Technology who says, "'We sense that we are close to being able to alter human heredity ... This is something to which all people should pay attention.'"  By incorporating the voice of someone who has won one of the most prestigious honors for advancements made in science, Jackson both builds her credibility, as well as the legitimacy of the international summit conference being held.  After pointing out that germline editing, at the moment, "has somewhat scant support," Jackson calls upon the leaders of the United States for support, saying, "The White House, for instance, has cautioned that "altering the human germline for clinical purposes is a line that should not be crossed at this time," a stance reiterated at the DC summit by the White House senior science advisor John Holdren" (Jackson). By alluding to these authority figures, Jackson constructs a sense of reliability that gains her audience's respect and support.

Another way of establishing this credibility is for the author to use scientific language and fact to prove that she does, indeed, know what she is talking about.  Molly Jackson first utilizes this technique by explaining the different methods of gene editing.  She focuses on the CRISPR-Cas9, the method used by the Chinese team, whose "embryo experiments were the first to involve genes that could potentially be passed on to the next generation" (Jackson).  She then goes on to explain that this method is still somewhat inaccurate and, thus, extremely unsafe.  By discussing one of the main methods of genetic modification, Jackson builds support for her claims.  She proves her own education and knowledge on the subject. In another instance Jackson acknowledges the possible benefits of gene editing, which is the "opportunity to prevent disease in gene editing technology - a tool to stop what have been deemed inheritable diseases by editing parents' genes, which would then be passed on to future children." By acknowledging the scientific advantages of genetic modification, Jackson communicates to the reader that she knows there are some benefits regarding the matter, but she remains firm in her concerns as well.  Since an important aspect of ethos is displaying goodwill, by recognizing the benefits of these advancements, Jackson is creating an even deeper sense of trust between herself and the reader.  Lastly, Jackson uses scientific statistics to build her credibility.  She explains, based on a Pew survey by the Pew Research Center based in Washington D.C., that eighty-three percent of Americans are opposed to the modification of a baby's genes to improve his or her intelligence, and fifty percent are even opposed to editing genes in order to prevent hereditary diseases (Jackson).  It is important that these statistics come from a reliable source, as survey data can be easily manipulated.  By incorporating both scientific language and scientific statistical fact, Jackson becomes a more intelligent, reliable author in the eyes of the reader.

Jackson's article also contains elements of kairos, pathos, and logos, which ultimately make her argument more persuasive.  Jackson uses kairos by opening her article with the discussion of the scientific debate being held at the International Summit.  In doing this, Jackson demonstrates a sense of appropriate timing in her article and communicates to the reader the reason that he or she should take interest in the content of her article.  Pathos, the appeal to emotion, can first be found when Jackson explains that the results of genetic engineering are highly unpredictable and, moreover, that no matter what the results, they could affect multiple generations to come.  By referring to the next generations, Jackson leads the reader to consider what the future would look like for his or her children and grandchildren.  This tie to family causes the reader to worry, and it most likely also causes the reader to become a bit more skeptical of genetic engineering as a whole.  Lastly, logos can be seen throughout the article in Jackson's structure and explanations of what gene editing is and why it is worrying so many people.  For example, after describing the CRISPR/Cas9 method of gene editing, Jackson explains the logic behind scientists' worries by quoting biologist Dr. Kate O'Conner-Giles saying, "'This is evolving rapidly because it's so easy to use. But it's easy to use in the sense of making something happen. It's not easy to use necessarily in the sense of making what you want to have happen'."  She continues her use of logos by referencing statistical findings that show the percentage of Americans who oppose genetic engineering in order to support her previous claims.  Jackson might have strengthened the argument by using logos to discuss how gene editing could severely widen the gap between social classes or speak of the possible mutations that could occur from these procedures.  Overall, though, Jackson's focus on ethos is most effective, as she is able to be much more persuasive once her audience knows that she and her information are reliable.   

Molly Jackson establishes a sense of credibility several times throughout her article on human genetic engineering.  Through the use of ethos, Jackson becomes more reliable, respectable, and persuasive.  First, she references many authority figures, which leads the reader to trust that the contents of the article are legitimate.  Most notably, she references the international summit debate, Nobel Prize winner, David Baltimore, and the White House.  She also uses scientific language and fact to establish validity.  She includes an explanation of different gene editing methods and statistics on the public's current attitude toward the issue.  Lastly, Jackson includes elements of pathos to play on emotion, logos to set up a clear structure for the article, and even kairos to display the relevancy of the issue.  Through the use of Aristotle's three most important rhetorical writing components, Molly Jackson creates a persuasive and informative article on the concerns of human genetic engineering.    

