Writer 1: A Causal Argument Showing Alternative Approaches to Reducing Risk of A
ID: 2904036 • Letter: W
Question
Writer 1: A Causal Argument Showing Alternative Approaches to Reducing Risk of Alcoholism
Writer 1 argues that vegetarianism may be an effective way to resist alcoholism. She uses just one statement from the ACSH article for her own purpose and then moves on to other sources.
Another approach to fighting alcoholism is through naturopathy, holistic medicine, and vegetarianism. Vegetarians generally have better health than the rest of the population and particularly have, according to the American Council on Science and Health, “a lower risk of becoming alcoholic.” This lower risk has been borne out by other studies showing that the benefits of the holistic health movement are particularly strong for persons with addictive tendencies. . . . [goes on to other arguments and sources]
writer 2: A PROPOSAL ARGUMENT ADVOCATING VEGETARIANISM
Not only will a vegetarian diet help stop cruelty to animals, but it is also good for your health. According to the American Council on Science and Health, vegetarians have longer life expectancy than nonvegetarians and suffer from fewer chronic diseases. The Council cites “strong” evidence from the scientific literature showing that vegetarians have reduced risk of lung cancer, obesity, constipation, and alcohol-ism. The Council also cites “good” evidence that they have a reduced risk of adult- onset diabetes, high blood pressure, gallstones, and hardening of the arteries. Although the evidence isn’t nearly as strong, vegetarianism may also lower the risk of certain cancers, kidney stones, loss of bone density, and tooth decay.
3: An Evaluation Argument Looking Skeptically at Vegetarianism
Here, Writer 3 uses portions of theme article to make an opposite case from that of Writer 2. She focuses on those parts of the article that Writer 2 consciously excluded.
The link between vegetarianism and death rates is a classic instance of correlation rather than causation. While it is true that vegetarians have a longer life expectancy than no vegetarians and suffer from fewer chronic diseases, the American Council on Science and Health has shown that the causes can mostly be explained by factors other than diet. As the Council suggests, vegetarians are apt to be more health conscious than no vegetarians and thus get more exercise, stay slender, and avoid smoking. The Council points out that vegetarians also tend to be wealthier than no vegetarians and see their doctors more regularly. In short, they live longer because they take better care of themselves, not because they avoid meat.
FOR CLASS DISCUSSION Using a Source for Different Purposes
Each of the hypothetical writers uses the short ACSH argument in different ways for different purposes. Working individually or in small groups, respond to the following questions; be prepared to elaborate on and defend your answers.
1. How does each writer use the original article differently and why?
2. If you were the author of the article from the American Council on Science and Health, would you think that your article is used fairly and responsibly in each instance?
3. Suppose your goal were simply to summarize the argument from the American Council on Science and Health. Write a brief summary of the argument and then explain how your summary is different from the partial summaries by writers 2 and 3
Explanation / Answer
1. Each writer uses the suitable extracts from the contents of the original article to propogate his or her own views. These extracts are used in support of the writer's views.
2. If I were the writer of the original article from the Americal Council on Science and Health ( ACSH), I would be amused and surprised at the various differing views of the writers at the use of different extracts from the article.The article has not been used fairly or responsibly. Each writer had his/her own views regarding alternative approaches to reducing the risk of alcoholism. Rather that producing clinching evidence in support of their views, the writers have made an error of just using various extracts of the ACSH article to support their views.The first writer's statement that " Vegetarians generally havebetter health than the rest of the population and a lower risk of becoming alcoholic" does not establish the lower risk of becoming an alcoholic to Vegetarianism. The 2nd writer states that " vegetarians have reduced risk of lung cancer, obesity, constipation, and alcohol-ism". This writer merely includes lower risk of alcoholism for vegetarians amonst a host of other benefits, but does not establish a coorelation between the two phenomenon.The 3rd writer uses portions of the ACSH article to make an opposite case from that of Writer 2. She focuses on those parts of the article that Writer 2 consciously excluded. However, this writer also does not use the ACSH article in a wholistic manner.
3. The ACSH article compares the health of Vegetarians and NOn- Vegetarians. It mentions that the Vegetarians, ingeneral, enjoy a better health than the Non-Vegetarians, but also states that the causes can mostly be explained by factors other than diet. The ACSH article states that " vegetarians are apt to be more health conscious than non- vegetarians and thus get more exercise, stay slender, and avoid smoking". The ACSH article also mentions that "the Vegetarians see their doctors more regularly. In short, they live longer because they take better care of themselves, not because they avoid meat" This summary uses the ACSH article wholistically and explains that better health of Vegetarians is not because of absence of mmeat in their diet, but rather due to the Vegetarians, generally, taking better care of themselves".
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.