Daniel Stone, a practicing physician in internal medicine, writes “Our Big Appetite for Healthcare” to argue how California’s healthcare needs to change. In the article, Stone discusses how California’s “more is better” health care is costly, inefficient, and insignificant. The author creates his argument with the methods of appeals; logos, a logical appeal, and ethos, an ethical appeal. Stone establishes his argument by mainly using logos with indicative reasoning to support his argument.
Stone uses ethos less frequently then logos. In the article, Stone’s ethos is accomplished by using a real life example when he stated, “Consider just one example: A doctor I know recently submitted a referral for a costly MRI scan for a 46-year-old woman with a week
…show more content…
First, he uses an analogy fallacy, he is comparing the healthcare industry to Starbucks. Stone even creates this into a syndrome when he states, “They expect their CT scans, when they want them, in much the same way they expect their decaf caramel extra hot low-fat macchiato. Think of it as the Starbucks syndrome in healthcare,” in order to explain his analogy. The author also establishes the appeal of everyone living in California as huge snobs. This leads into his second fallacy, when he uses a generalization fallacy, he assumes that all Californians expects everything to run how a Starbucks runs. Starbucks is known to be quick, and efficient, and Stone goes back to the first ethical example involving the premature ordering of the MRI scan when he states, “The doctor saved time and avoided a difficult discussion by going along. The patient saved a trip and got what she wanted. Just as she would have at Starbucks,” to provide how patients want their doctors to be how their baristas would be at Starbucks. Although, Stone uses these two fallacies as part of his strategy it help persuade the readers by using a relatable experience that we have all had, a trip to
Eugene V. Debs, the United State’s most influential union leader and avid socialist gives light to many issues including presidency, systems of society, and most importantly the unemployed in his speech “The Issue”. Debs was imprisoned in the 1890s for illegally encouraging a railroad strike, he also was sentenced to 10 years for his discouragement to the United States’ involvement in World War I. Debs has been a remarkable figure in the socialist party and had influenced so many. In Eugene Debs’ speech, Debs’ uses rhetorical appeal to relate to and convince his audience of the “issues” in the United
Healthcare in the United States is an extremely often discussed topic on whether it is morally a right or just a charity to those who cannot afford it. Plenty claim that health care is too expensive and not affordable so they demand aid from the government. On the other hand, the rest presume that the state is not morally accountable to take this type of action, since not every citizen and human being is equally eligible to receive the same healthcare.
One of the most controversial topics in the United States in recent years has been the route which should be undertaken in overhauling the healthcare system for the millions of Americans who are currently uninsured. It is important to note that the goal of the Affordable Care Act is to make healthcare affordable; it provides low-cost, government-subsidized insurance options through the State Health Insurance Marketplace (Amadeo 1). Our current president, Barack Obama, made it one of his goals to bring healthcare to all Americans through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. This plan, which has been termed “Obamacare”, has come under scrutiny from many Americans, but has also received a large amount of support in turn for a variety of reasons. Some of these reasons include a decrease in insurance discrimination on the basis of health or gender and affordable healthcare coverage for the millions of uninsured. The opposition to this act has cited increased costs and debt accumulation, a reduction in employer healthcare coverage options, as well as a penalization of those already using private healthcare insurance.
In 102 Minutes, Chapter 7, authors Dwyer and Flynn use ethos, logos, and pathos to appeal to the readers’ consciences, minds and hearts regarding what happened to the people inside the Twin Towers on 9/11. Of particular interest are the following uses of the three appeals.
“The Onion’s” mock press release on the MagnaSoles satirical article effectively attacks the rhetorical devices, ethos and logos, used by companies to demonstrate how far advertisers will go to convince people to buy their products. It does this by using manipulative, “scientific-sounding" terminology, comparisons, fabrication, and hyperboles.
When using quotes, the author can show that he has done research because he pulled the quotes from multiple sources. An example of this ethos is on page 32 chapter two, it states “Tolstoy once wrote what fascinated him about war was “its reality” – not the strategies of generals or the maneuvers of troops but the “actual killings”. “He was more interested to know in what way and under the influence of what feelings one soldier kills another”. This is a prime example of ethos because it evokes the emotion of the reader, not only this but it talks about emotion which is in fact ethos. For an example of logos, the reader can look at page 250 paragraph one, the example is that of the death toll of the Union soldiers.
Paul Krugman’s humorous rhetoric both entertains and informs the reader towards America’s consistent uneducated assumptions of other countries. He opens with a critical approach of the Republican Candidate, Jeb Bush and his comment about French work weeks. Krugman immediately shot down Bush’s argument and referred him as “french toast”, in order to describe the weight of the outcome on his campaign in a joking manner. He inserts an interjection and utilizes common speech to convey straight messages about his possible political standing in the presidential race and elaborates on how groundless his statements were about the French work ethic. Krugman’s sour critique then moves onto yet another Republican, Ben Carson. Although there weren’t any
Dr. Atul Gawande, a Harvard Medical School graduate and writer for The New Yorker, phenomenally illustrates the unknown side of healthcare professions in his book, Complications: A Surgeon’s Notes on an Imperfect Science. By exploring the ethical and analytical aspects of medicine while entertaining readers with relatable anecdotes, Gawande impresses on his audience the importance of recognizing the wonders of the healthcare field, as well as the fallibility of those within it.
Albert Einstein declared, “The most important thing is to never stop questioning.” Questions help extend our knowledge by opening our minds to change and new possibilities. The excerpt talks about the mindset that scientists need to become successful and the process they go through to make new discoveries. In The Great Influenza, John M. Barry educates citizens of the everyday challenges that scientists face through utilizing rhetorical questions, cause and effect, and contrast.
Imagine being told that your kidney does not function anymore, and having to wait an average of ten years of waiting for a transplant, and yet being afraid of dealing with the black market for a new organ. Joanna Mackay believes that these lives lost every day can be saved, as said in her essay “Organs Sales Will Save Lives”. MacKay’s purpose is to decriminalize organs sales. The rhetorical strategies used by MacKay are ethos, logos and pathos. These 3 strategies are used to persuade the audience of the benefits that may come to both the donor and the patient if decriminalized.
In the modern day, health care can be a sensitive subject. Politically, health care in America changes depending on whom is President. Obamacare and Trumpcare are different policies regarding health care, which many people have passionate feelings towards. However, not many Americans are informed about Norman Daniels’ view on health care. Throughout this paper I will be outlining Norman Daniels’ claims on the right to health care, and the fundamental principles in which he derives to construct his argument. By means of evaluating Daniels’ argument, I will then state my beliefs regarding the distributive justice of health care.
The United States (U.S.) has a health care system that is much different than any other health care system in the world (Nies & McEwen, 2015). It is frequently recognized as one with most recent technological inventions, but at the same time is often criticized for being overly expensive (Nies & McEwen, 2015). In 2010, President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) (U. S. Department of Health & Human Services, n.d.) This plan was implemented in an attempt to make preventative care more affordable and accessible for all uninsured Americans (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, n.d.). Under the law, the new Patient’s Bill of Rights gives consumers the power to be in charge of their health care choices. (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, n.d.).
With congress passing ObamaCare last year we are taking baby steps towards a health system overhaul we so desperately need. The skeptics, though, still argue against it, citing the costs as too much or that it’s un-american. Health care is a basic need for everyone, and as such should be right protected and provided for by the government. There are great, economic, moral, and social benefits to be reaped, and so it is important for our government to continue down this path its started and also important for Americans to provide our full support. There is much to overcome to completely reverse the direction of the health system, and I’m sure it will take many years for the results to pay off, but I’m glad we’ve at least provided the groundwork for future generations to build
Despite the established health care facilities in the United States, most citizens do not have access to proper medical care. We must appreciate from the very onset that a healthy and strong nation must have a proper health care system. Such a health system should be available and affordable to all. The cost of health services is high. In fact, the ...
NOT LONG AGO we attended a talk at an academic conference where the speaker’s central claim seemed to be that a certain sociologist—call him Dr. X—had done very good work in a number of areas of the discipline. The speaker proceeded to illustrate his thesis by referring extensively and in great detail to various books and articles by Dr. X and by quoting long passages from them. The speaker was obviously both learned and impassioned, but as we listened to his talk we found ourselves somewhat puzzled: the argument—that Dr. X’s work was very important—was clear enough, but why did the speaker need to make it in the first place? Did anyone dispute it? Were there commentators in the field who had argued against X’s work or challenged its value?