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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"According to author art and music therapy have therapeutic effects on mentally or physically ill patients. But doctors do not recommend art and music therapy but recommend drugs and invasive procedures that carry risks and side effects. With this logic it is concluded that doctors do not recommend low cost art and music therapy but support expensive treatment, and add to rising cost of health care in United States.
However, there has been no mention of actual cost and duration of art and music therapy, as a result it is flawed to conclude that art and music treatment is cheap. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the art and music therapy and the risks involved in them are not mentioned hence they cannot be termed risk free.
Possibly, some data on the experiments conducted with art and music therapy should have been mentioned to know the effectiveness of the treatment. In addition, some evidence on number of patients who can be treated with art and music therapy instead of drugs and invasive procedures should have been mentioned also the cost difference in treatment before generalizing the conclusion for entire United States. "![]()
"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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"According to author art and music therapy have therapeutic effects on mentally or physically ill patients. But doctors do not recommend art and music therapy but recommend drugs and invasive procedures that carry risks and side effects. With this logic it is concluded that doctors do not recommend low cost art and music therapy but support expensive treatment, and add to rising cost of health care in United States.
However, there has been no mention of actual cost and duration of art and music therapy, as a result it is flawed to conclude that art and music treatment is cheap. Furthermore, the effectiveness of the art and music therapy and the risks involved in them are not mentioned hence they cannot be termed risk free.
Possibly, some data on the experiments conducted with art and music therapy should have been mentioned to know the effectiveness of the treatment. In addition, some evidence on number of patients who can be treated with art and music therapy instead of drugs and invasive procedures should have been mentioned also the cost difference in treatment before generalizing the conclusion for entire United States. "