Healthcare has always been a much debated subject among many people. Some believe that there should be a universal healthcare system. A system where healthcare is offered to everyone regardless of status or pre-existing conditions. However there are those who argue on the other side of this topic, voicing their thoughts that the healthcare system should remain the way it is now. The editorial arguing for an universal healthcare system uses rhetoric appeals such as pathos and ethos, as well as uses other nations healthcare system's as an example, whereas the editorial arguing against a universal healthcare system uses logos and ethos as appeals.
The editorial for an universal healthcare system uses evidence appealing to the rhetorical appeals pathos, and ethos. The editorial uses the following quote, "I have been a doctor for nearly 10 years in that time I have seen many patients suffer needlessly because they had no insurance". The fact that the doctor has been in practice for 10 years shows that the doctor is a creditable source. It shows that his claims are backed by personal experience. The editorial also states, "The worst case was a patient that died as a direct result of a tooth ache". This statement uses pathos to take …show more content…
The editorial in favor of an universal healthcare system depends on pathos and ethos. It appeals to the sensitive side of readers, using personal stories from doctors and others who have suffered through the system. The editorial thrives off of an emotional response to lead the way in the case of healthcare systems. However, the editorial against an universal healthcare system approached the audience of readers through a very logical appeal. The editorial against universal healthcare focused more on breaking down counter claims with facts and numbers. On the other hand, both editorials use ethos to further their arguments. They both use creditable sources to further their ideals. To progress their
The editorial for an universal healthcare system uses evidence appealing to the rhetorical appeals pathos, and ethos. The editorial uses the following quote, "I have been a doctor for nearly 10 years in that time I have seen many patients suffer needlessly because they had no insurance". The fact that the doctor has been in practice for 10 years shows that the doctor is a creditable source. It shows that his claims are backed by personal experience. The editorial also states, "The worst case was a patient that died as a direct result of a tooth ache". This statement uses pathos to take …show more content…
The editorial in favor of an universal healthcare system depends on pathos and ethos. It appeals to the sensitive side of readers, using personal stories from doctors and others who have suffered through the system. The editorial thrives off of an emotional response to lead the way in the case of healthcare systems. However, the editorial against an universal healthcare system approached the audience of readers through a very logical appeal. The editorial against universal healthcare focused more on breaking down counter claims with facts and numbers. On the other hand, both editorials use ethos to further their arguments. They both use creditable sources to further their ideals. To progress their