Hana Rosin Ineffectively Argues the Question "Can We Really 'Cure' Autism?"
Hana Rosin Ineffectively Argues the Question “Can We Really ‘Cure’ Autism?”
In a recent article written by Hana Rosin titled “Can We Really ‘Cure’ Autism?” she argues against a recent finding that claims, with a little help due to social interacting, those with autism may be able to “’outgrow’ their symptoms” (Rosin 1). Rosin’s response was that the finding is “unsatisfying” and “half-hearted” due to the finding implying that in order to cure autism, people with the disorder simply need to have social interactions. With autism being a disorder of such common knowledge these days, one would think it would be easy to dispute the finding. Due to the way Rosin presents her claims, her arguments seems invalid. In her article, Rosin’s lack of credibility, as well as her use of irrelevant statements, makes her argument ineffective.
Autism is a disorder that usually occurs as a result of some kind of mutation to an individual’s DNA. In most cases this occurs before birth. Since autism a defect in one’s DNA, it has been said to be irreversible. Finding out that there could possibly be a way to fix the defect would definitely cause a stir.
In Rosin’s article, she makes herself appear as if she is lacking due to her absence of facts. Throughout the article Rosin never really uses any factual evidence to support her claims. Instead of quoting what the findings say, Rosin claims that the study is “nothing that will change our thinking about the progress of autism” (Rosin 3) taking it upon herself to tell the readers how they would feel about the findings. Rosin also seems to downplay what could be an important find stating “One measure the researchers used to evaluate the progress was ‘typically developing friends’ which people with autism sometimes have anyway” (Rosin 4). By stating this, Rosin makes it seem as though that is not quite the explanation that she wanted.
Rosin’s use of begging the question is another reason why her argument is ineffective. As stated before, Rosin does not do a very good job at using evidence or facts to try to get the reader to agree with her argument; instead she is constantly attacking the study. Throughout the article Rosin uses disparaging words or statements such as “dimly aware” or “ostensibly”. By doing this it shows the reader that instead of using her intellect to disprove the study she just resorts to name-calling.
Rosin’s article makes the reader feel like she might not really know what she is talking about. Even though Rosin may feel a certain way about the studies that were found, she should not let her feelings take over the entire article like they did. The best way to get the reader to agree with what one is writing about is to be knowledgeable on what the topic is instead of writing solely on opinion as rosin did. Due to the lack of hard evidence and facts as well as the lack of relevance, Hana Rosin’s articles ineffective in arguing against autism is something that one can overcome.
Works Cited
Rosin, Hanna. “Can We Really ‘Cure’ Autisim?” New Scientist. Reed Business Information, 23 Jan. 2013. Web. 30 Jan. 2013.
In a recent article written by Hana Rosin titled “Can We Really ‘Cure’ Autism?” she argues against a recent finding that claims, with a little help due to social interacting, those with autism may be able to “’outgrow’ their symptoms” (Rosin 1). Rosin’s response was that the finding is “unsatisfying” and “half-hearted” due to the finding implying that in order to cure autism, people with the disorder simply need to have social interactions. With autism being a disorder of such common knowledge these days, one would think it would be easy to dispute the finding. Due to the way Rosin presents her claims, her arguments seems invalid. In her article, Rosin’s lack of credibility, as well as her use of irrelevant statements, makes her argument ineffective.
Autism is a disorder that usually occurs as a result of some kind of mutation to an individual’s DNA. In most cases this occurs before birth. Since autism a defect in one’s DNA, it has been said to be irreversible. Finding out that there could possibly be a way to fix the defect would definitely cause a stir.
In Rosin’s article, she makes herself appear as if she is lacking due to her absence of facts. Throughout the article Rosin never really uses any factual evidence to support her claims. Instead of quoting what the findings say, Rosin claims that the study is “nothing that will change our thinking about the progress of autism” (Rosin 3) taking it upon herself to tell the readers how they would feel about the findings. Rosin also seems to downplay what could be an important find stating “One measure the researchers used to evaluate the progress was ‘typically developing friends’ which people with autism sometimes have anyway” (Rosin 4). By stating this, Rosin makes it seem as though that is not quite the explanation that she wanted.
Rosin’s use of begging the question is another reason why her argument is ineffective. As stated before, Rosin does not do a very good job at using evidence or facts to try to get the reader to agree with her argument; instead she is constantly attacking the study. Throughout the article Rosin uses disparaging words or statements such as “dimly aware” or “ostensibly”. By doing this it shows the reader that instead of using her intellect to disprove the study she just resorts to name-calling.
Rosin’s article makes the reader feel like she might not really know what she is talking about. Even though Rosin may feel a certain way about the studies that were found, she should not let her feelings take over the entire article like they did. The best way to get the reader to agree with what one is writing about is to be knowledgeable on what the topic is instead of writing solely on opinion as rosin did. Due to the lack of hard evidence and facts as well as the lack of relevance, Hana Rosin’s articles ineffective in arguing against autism is something that one can overcome.
Works Cited
Rosin, Hanna. “Can We Really ‘Cure’ Autisim?” New Scientist. Reed Business Information, 23 Jan. 2013. Web. 30 Jan. 2013.