For the sake of national security, this country cannot afford to retreat from the world. Its investment in the State Department and foreign aid helps advance peace and stability by feeding starving people, providing access to doctors and medicines, opening new markets, promoting democracy, curbing nuclear arms and strengthening allies with military and economic assistance. It also gives Washington leverage.
P1: Its [United States] investment in the State Dept. & foreign aid advances peace & stability.
P2: Investments provide access to new markets of doctors and medicines.
P3: [implied: the U.S. healthcare system is not efficient and needs some form of change/help]
P3: It promotes democracy and curbs nuclear arms possession.
P4: It gives the U.S. military and economic assistance, and leverage.
P5: [implied: the U.S. could use this help because of our spread out military as a result of the war on terror, the financial help as result of our massive deficit, and the leverage, as a result of falling out of favor with other countries due to military actions of the past decade.
______________
C: This country [U.S.] cannot afford to retreat from the world.
This article was taken from an editorial in the New York Times, entitled, "No Time To Get Stingy," by Carlos Giacomo (10/08/2011). I think this is a good example of a strong and fairly cogent inductive argument with several implied facts to help solidify the structure of the argument. Anyone reading this editorial would have basic knowledge of our nation's foreign affairs, and current policy issues. While the country seems divided on many issues today, especially in congress, both republicans and democrats will acknowledge that our heath care system needs some kind of change, our economy needs help, and any leverage and favor with allied countries is definitely something that is not overly abundant these days. I think that public policy editorials are one of the most difficult venues for appearing unbiased, however, by pointing out problems and appealing for help instead of recommending an action, Giacomo does a fairly good job of presenting a moderate and generally acceptable article.
I agree with most of your argument except for the implied premises. I went and found the article because I thought maybe there would be more on those in there and I found nothing. I don't think the author said or implied anything about health care reform in the US. He mentioned a few programs in Africa and other places in the world but did not mention anything about our health care. Other than that I agree with your argument and with the fact that Giacomo writes a pretty good article too.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very good argument to choose. There is a lot of information stored within the paragraph you have given us to look at and the premises that follow seem to be quite on point. This argument is one that I agree with. No matter what, everyone in the world needs health care because without it, we will obviously die. I also agree with what you said that no matter what your political standing is, you should feel strongly about this subject matter. This is not a battle of the political parties, but rather a highly important issue for all people in the United States. Good choice.
ReplyDelete