The following appeared in a medical magazine:
"Art and music have long been understood to have therapeutic effects for individuals who suffer from either physical or mental illnesses. However, most doctors rarely recommend to patients some form of art or music therapy. Instead, doctors focus almost all of their attention on costly drug treatments and invasive procedures that carry serious risks and side-effects. By focusing on these expensive procedures rather than low-cost treatments such as art and music therapy, doctors are doing a disservice to their patients and contributing to the rising cost of health care in the United States."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument states that art and music forms have healing power for patients suffering from physical or mental illness.Instead doctors prescribe to expensive drugs and costly invasive treatments to cure their patients . The argument is flawed as it is based on baseless assumptions and reasoning.
Firstly, author mentions that art and music have played therapeutic effects for patients who suffer from mental and physical illness , but he has not given any respondents on whom the therapies have worked . The history and demography of the people on whom these treatments have been given are not mentioned in the argument.The author has mentioned of art and music , but any kind of art/music cannot bring relief to the patients, the author needs to provide valid data of kind /type of art and music he has been talking about.Author mentions about doctors are doing a disservice to their patients and in its process they are rising the costs of health care in United States but he has not given any proof or statistical data over a period of time to substantiate his point.
Secondly, the degree of illness the patients are suffering from is nowhere mentioned and may be the patients are in a later stage or critical stages of diseases . In the cases of severe patients the expensive drugs and invasive procedures are a mandatory requirement in healing the illness of individuals.The side effects and risks are not given explicitly, may be the risks and side effects are very minimal .The author has to categorize the severity of these risks and side effects.
Thirdly, the author points out that art and music is synonymous with costly drug treatments and invasive procedures , but he has failed to take into account that the kinds and degree of illness varies to a great extent and we cannot compare the two.People nowadays do not have enough time to go for the slow healing process rather they need to take into account a fast efficient relieve process which can heal them quickly and they do not mind spending fast and quick efficient ways of treatment for which they happily pay for the costly treatment and drugs.
In sum , the argument has serious flaws as it is based on unsubstantiated data , illogical reasoning and unreasonable assumptions.In order to make the argument cogent and convincing the author has to provides valid evidence , statistical data and proper reasoning , without these factors the argument is not cogent.
"Art and music have long been understood to have therapeutic effects for individuals who suffer from either physical or mental illnesses. However, most doctors rarely recommend to patients some form of art or music therapy. Instead, doctors focus almost all of their attention on costly drug treatments and invasive procedures that carry serious risks and side-effects. By focusing on these expensive procedures rather than low-cost treatments such as art and music therapy, doctors are doing a disservice to their patients and contributing to the rising cost of health care in the United States."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument states that art and music forms have healing power for patients suffering from physical or mental illness.Instead doctors prescribe to expensive drugs and costly invasive treatments to cure their patients . The argument is flawed as it is based on baseless assumptions and reasoning.
Firstly, author mentions that art and music have played therapeutic effects for patients who suffer from mental and physical illness , but he has not given any respondents on whom the therapies have worked . The history and demography of the people on whom these treatments have been given are not mentioned in the argument.The author has mentioned of art and music , but any kind of art/music cannot bring relief to the patients, the author needs to provide valid data of kind /type of art and music he has been talking about.Author mentions about doctors are doing a disservice to their patients and in its process they are rising the costs of health care in United States but he has not given any proof or statistical data over a period of time to substantiate his point.
Secondly, the degree of illness the patients are suffering from is nowhere mentioned and may be the patients are in a later stage or critical stages of diseases . In the cases of severe patients the expensive drugs and invasive procedures are a mandatory requirement in healing the illness of individuals.The side effects and risks are not given explicitly, may be the risks and side effects are very minimal .The author has to categorize the severity of these risks and side effects.
Thirdly, the author points out that art and music is synonymous with costly drug treatments and invasive procedures , but he has failed to take into account that the kinds and degree of illness varies to a great extent and we cannot compare the two.People nowadays do not have enough time to go for the slow healing process rather they need to take into account a fast efficient relieve process which can heal them quickly and they do not mind spending fast and quick efficient ways of treatment for which they happily pay for the costly treatment and drugs.
In sum , the argument has serious flaws as it is based on unsubstantiated data , illogical reasoning and unreasonable assumptions.In order to make the argument cogent and convincing the author has to provides valid evidence , statistical data and proper reasoning , without these factors the argument is not cogent.
