Medicare: Facts and Convictions - Article Review

In the article, "Medicare: Facts and Convictions," Gary Gutting uses clever appeals to convey his opinion on debates and how to correctly formulate them. Right off the bat, Gutting appeals to our sense of logos by presenting us with a theory about people, " We tend to view our political arguments as instruments of intellectual compulsion, forcing opponents to recognize the truth." By logically laying out the foundation for his article, he is telling us what side he's on. However, what separates this piece from other pieces is the complex structure in which he builds his argument around. The genius behind this article is explained surprisingly by him, "...however, I want to explore another way of understanding intractable political disagreements, taking as an example my recent effort to get a handle on the current debate over Medicare." By using Medicare as a vehicle for his argument, he appeals to the audience's pathos. Many American citizens can relate to the crisis involving Medicare and would definitely be deeply interested on the topic. An indicator of exemplary writing is the ability to state both sides of the argument fairly, not only focusing on your side of the issue. Gutting does this remarkably by admitting that his opposition, Paul Ryan, did do something right, " He rightly started with the essential first step in an y helpful argument: with premises that he and his opponents agree on." To be able to admit that the opposition can also be correct shows maturity and that reveals great writing as well. The aura of ethos that surrounds the author, Gary Gutting, is evident by the tiny blurb at the start of the article. It states that he is a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame. Just by noting that, the reader subconsciously connects credibility with the author.

Not only is this piece a great example of good writing, but also a critical stake on a issue related to the "environment," in this case the political environment. Gutting's kairotic article on Medicare strikes at the heart of most citizens. Just as election time rolls around, this article timely comes out. He quickly gets to the root of the issue, simplyfing the debate for those less knowledgeable on politics, "Simplifying quite a bit, I came up with the following: Ryan wants to control costs by introducing market mechanisms into the Medicare system, whereas Obama wants to control costs by having government agencies exercise various sorts of control over medical practices." He succinctly ends the article with a well thought out conclusion that sums up the article in terms of Medicare and his argument on debates by saying whether or not is it Medicare or any other controversial issue, there is always a possibility of convincing the opposition, but when you start arguing on convictions, the debate becomes fruitless.