you will examine the inventor and futurologist Ray Kurzweil’s contention that immortality will soon be technologic

In this writing assignment you will present Kurzweil’s reasoning as a valid argument. (The test of validity is as follows: if all the premises were true, would the conclusion also have to be true? If the answer is “yes,” then the argument is valid.) Note that Kurtzweil may be relying on one or more implicit (unspoken) premises. Your argument should include any implicit premises you think Kurtzweil is relying on. Make sure to separately number each premise and the conclusion of the argument. The argument you offer on behalf of Kurtzweil should be clearly and precisely stated. You may wish to add a clarificatory section immediately after the argument in which you explain any premise that would not be entirely clear on its own. Kurtzweil says a lot of things in the article, and most of these are not directly relevant to the conclusion that immortality will soon be technologically possible. The argument you present should include only premises relevant to establishing that conclusion. Once you have clearly presented Kurtzweil’s argument, present one problem for one premise in the argument. Make sure to specify exactly which premise you are targeting, and exactly what the problem is. You do not need to solve the problem that you raise for the argument (though you can if you want to). Your writing assignment must discuss and demonstrate understanding of the philosophical theories of personal identity you have been learning about. Kurtzweil seems to be implicitly assuming a particular theory of personal identity, and that assumption should show up in the argument you present. Your writing assignment should have the following structure: 1. Valid argument on behalf of Kurtzweil. Each premise and the conclusion must be separately numbered. 2. Clarificatory section (optional) 3. Criticism of a single premise in Kurtzweil’s argument. The specific premise being criticized must be identified by number, and the nature of the criticism must be stated as fully and clearly as possible