Nano Tech

• What is the main point of contention between Drexler and Smalley?
• The self building nanobot and how it will work. They both agree that "Smalley fingers" would never be possible but they lack a better solution.
• What is at stake in their argument?
• Both their reputations are on the line and they have to fight cleanly since the argument is being held publicly.
• Name a few strategies they use to refute the other side. 
•  They both use previous knowledge and expertise to attack each other over this issue. Drexler trying to explain how the nanobots would work would be the simplest solution to this conflict.
• How does both Smalley and Drexler develop their ethos (provide an example)
• Both of them use large words then cite their previous works:
• Drexler: "in my MIT doctoral thesis"
• Smalley: "my 2001 article in Scientific American"
• Point to at least one logical fallacy used on both sides and explain why it is fallacy (see GRs pg 17-19)
• Smalley used a non sequitur leaping from a talk that he did with high schoolers and their fears about killer robots to Drexler and his colleagues being horrible monsters. 
• Drexler
• Which side to do you think was more convincing and why?
• I think Eric Drexler's argument was a little more factually sound and Smalley kept pushing at Drexler. Smalley, it seemed, was  more or less attacking Drexler rather than his ideas. 

p.s. please never make us read about nano technologies again