Imagine a child got into an accident and was not treated because he does not have a medical insurance. This sounds truly unfair, but the research shows that about “50 million people in the United States are uninsured” (Health Care). Now assume if these 50 million people are not treated, does this sound fair? The health care is getting expensive day by day and not everyone is able to afford it, so a plan is needed to solve this issue. In my Political Science class, one of my peers argued with me that “making the health care free will not ensure equality among people”, so I used the rhetorical appeals, logos, pathos, ethos, and kairos to convince my peer that the free health care will allow fair dealings in the United States. The argument with my peer was based on the research and discussion about the free health care, an assignment given by my Political Science teacher after watching the documentary “Sicko” directed by …show more content…
The use of the rhetorical appeals, logos, ethos, pathos, and kairos, allowed me to explain to my peer that the free healthcare will overcome disparity, cite an emotional scene from the documentary “Sicko” to evoke sympathy, use former NHS chief executive’s quote to make my argument credible, and knew the instant in which I was arguing. All these appeals impacted my peer, but on a small scale, because there are many fallacies related to the health care system and to eliminate them, a lot of time is required. However, I was able to persuade her that the free health care will be rewarding, once enacted by showing that medical treatment will be readily available to every person. Thus, the argument about the free health care in my Political Science class has allowed me and my peer to see more clearly a new perspective of the world and provoked us to raise our voices against any
South Park is an animated TV series created by Trey Parker and Matt Stone, which first aired on Comedy Central in 1997. The show features four boys Eric Cartman, Stan Marsh, Kyle Broflovski, and Kenny McCormick. South Park has been seen as one of the most controversial shows due to its raunchy humor and obscene depiction of characters in the show. South Park deals with many current issues in the news surrounding anything from in politics to religion. In dealing with these issues South Park involves adult comedy that parodies current issues going on in the United States and around the world. South Park also uses many other rhetorical deceives, such as
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.
The tone during the whole plot of in Brave New World changes when advancing throughout the plot, but it often contains a dark and satiric aspect. Since the novel was originally planned to be written as a satire, the tone is ironic and sarcastic. Huxley's sarcastic tone is most noticeable in the conversations between characters. For instance, when the director was educating the students about the past history, he states that "most facts about the past do sound incredible (Huxley 45)." Through the exaggeration of words in the statement of the director, Huxley's sarcastic tone obviously is portrayed. As a result of this, the satirical tone puts the mood to be carefree.
Specific Purpose: To Persuade my audience that the United States needs to adopt universal health care.
In contrast to Aristotle, Roko Belic’s documentary “Happy” provides a fresh perspective that takes place far more recently. The film sets out to similar goals of Aristotle in defining the nature of happiness and exploring what makes different people happy in general. Unlike Aristotle, however, the film’s main argument refers to makes people happier. In this case, the film argues that merely “doing what you love” is what leads to happiness (Belic). The argument itself appears oddly self-serving, considering that message is what underlines the foundation of happiness, yet there is a subliminal message that a simpler lifestyle is what leads to what the film is trying to convince you of. The message itself is obviously addressed to Americans, considering
In the book Into the Wild, Jon Krakauer wrote about Christopher McCandless, a nature lover in search for independence, in a mysterious and hopeful experience. Even though Krakauer tells us McCandless was going to die from the beginning, he still gave him a chance for survival. As a reader I wanted McCandless to survive. In Into the Wild, Krakauer gave McCandless a unique perspective. He was a smart and unique person that wanted to be completely free from society. Krakauer included comments from people that said McCandless was crazy, and his death was his own mistake. However, Krakauer is able to make him seem like a brave person. The connections between other hikers and himself helped in the explanation of McCandless’s rational actions. Krakauer is able to make McCandless look like a normal person, but unique from this generation. In order for Krakauer to make Christopher McCandless not look like a crazy person, but a special person, I will analyze the persuading style that Krakauer used in Into the Wild that made us believe McCandless was a regular young adult.
The author begins his argument by retelling the story of his youth to build his ethos but the results are poor as it presents more questions on how he is a credible source on this argument as his only evidence is his own story. However, through the same means his pathos is built as his anecdote conveys feelings in the audience, making them more willing to listen. Graff finally, gives a call to action to schools to use students’ interests to develop their skills in rhetoric and analysis, which reveals the logic behind his argument. The topic about how students are taught rhetoric and analysis brings interest but with an average argument only built on pathos, a low amount of logos, and questionable ethos it can fall on deaf
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.
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.
America is known for democracy, freedom, and the American Dream. American citizens have the right to free speech, free press, the right to bear arms, and the right to religious freedom to name a few. The Declaration of Independence states that American citizens have the rights including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” America promises equality and freedom and the protection of their rights as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. But with all the rights and freedoms that American citizens enjoy, there is one particular area where the United States seems to be lacking. That area is health care. The United States is the only industrialized nation that doesn’t have some form of legal recognition of a right to health care (Yamin 1157). Health care reform in the United States has become a major controversy for politicians, health care professionals, businesses, and citizens. Those in opposition to reform claim that health care is not a human right, therefore the government should not be involved. Supporters of reform believe that health care is most definitely a human right and should be available to everyone in the United States instead of only those who can afford it, and that it is the government’s responsibility to uphold that right.
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
“The pen is mightier than the sword.” This is a popular saying that explains that, sometimes, in order to persuade or convince people, one should not use force but words. In Animal Farm, by George Orwell, animals overthrow the human leader and start a new life, but some animals want to become the new leaders. To make the other animals obey the pigs, they first have to persuade the farm’s population. Squealer is the best pig for this job because he effectively convinces the animals to follow Napoleon by using different rhetorical devices and methods of persuasion.
Recently, there has been much debate about universal health care in the United States. Both sides of the issue have many valid points to support their argument. They bring up points about the effect on the economy, individual costs, and whether or not healthcare is a right or not. In two particular editorials, the authors approached the topic with two very different argumentative structures. Both could have been effective in convincing readers to side with them, but one was more effective as it had far more elements of logos and ethos.
Resources have always been inadequate for food, economics and healthcare and all scarce resources are rationed in one way or another. Healthcare resources can be in the forms of medicine, machinery, expensive treatment and organ transplantation. For decades, allocation of healthcare resources in an equitable manner has always been the subject of debate, concern and analysis, yet the issue has persistently resisted resolution. Scarcity of resources for healthcare and issue of allocation is permanent and inescapable (Harris, “Deciding between Patients”). Scarcity can be defined in general, in emergency and in crises as well as shortage of certain kind of treatment, medicine or organs. As a result of scarcity of resources, and some people may be left untreated or die when certain patients are prioritized and intention of is that everyone will ultimately be treated (Harris, 2009: 335). Allocation of limited resources is an ethical issue since it is vital to address the question of justice and making fair decisions. Ethical judgments and concerns are part of daily choice in allocation of health resources and also to ensure these resources are allocated in a fair and just way. This paper will explore how QALYs, ageism and responsibility in particular influence the allocation of healthcare resources in general through the lens of justice, equity, social worth, fairness, and deservingness.
Everyone should have the right to the health care that they may need, Health care must be provided as a public good for everyone, financed publicly and equitably.