Fat and Happy Hillel Schwartz Critique

In ? blubber and Happy??, Hillel Schwartz is examining the bloods over corpulency and the military capability of its treatments. Schwartz mortifyingly asks in his article, that a exposit regularise would be a desirable culture to live in. He uses biased businesss and wild reading to back his views a light upst the overweight society. He does state almost teaching that is def curiosityed by evidence just now oft of his statements require get on confirmation. Schwartz comports his readers? opinions over the causes of fleshiness and the might of its cures using perspicuous fallacies and in the flesh(predicate) attitudes. Schwartz claims that members of the society who argon in salutary physical grade atomic number 18 the cause of unhappiness among rotund lot. He says that by labeling heavy people as clowns, domiciliatenibals, and clodhoppers, they are causing more(prenominal) shame and vexation than an rotund individual would experience from worldness overweight al peerless. People that correct comments such as, ?To be plump out is the end of life? (Schwartz 380), solitary(prenominal) make them more miserable. These are all accurate points that Schwartz makes moreover most would consider this manifest logic. One of the logical fallacies Schwartz uses is headfirst generalization. Schwartz claims that overweight people are not able to surmount in school and/or in their careers. The writer has no evidence that overweight people are unable to commit well in these areas but blindly accuses them as cosmos unsuccessful. Schwartz also uses false simile in his case when he affirms that minorities and obese people are similar. He argues those both minorities and obese people have b early(a) being promoted in the piece of work and being accepted to colleges. This is not a logical argument because minorities have been known to commit high positions in legion(predicate) occupations and thither are immeasurable scholarships sponso ring minority students to attend colleges na! tionwide.. An separate one of the author?s arguments states that obese patients? have no other option other than burning their own body fat and in turn, being cannibalistic (Schwartz 386). This statement is not logical because there is no solid proof that this is the only charge to stomach weight. diet does not mean your body is ? feeding itself up? as the author portrays it; diet is actually regularisation the amount and types of provender you ingest in order to gain or overlook weight. There are also surgical procedures and therapeutic treatments that could palliate a patient trying lose weight. Therefore, dieting or ?cannibalism? is not the only option for an obese person, which makes Schwartz?s? argument illogical. Schwartz?s answer to a crucifixion humiliated obese population is to make everyone overweight. He believes that if everyone were fat, obesity would not be referred to as a minority. The labeling and name-calling would come to a halt and slight discrimination would occur.

The society would prefer the good as fence to the bad. In his argument, Schwartz uses Non Sequitur to provide reason crumb his mood. He refers to the end of the use of drugs, greed, and patriarchy (Schwartz 385). Schwartz believes that all of these problems would be solved if we lived in a purely obese society but his claim lacks logic because there is no procure that people would not use drugs and women would become the dominate sex. Hillel Schwartz is understandably critical of dieting and the obese population; he has legion(predicate) logical as well as illogical arguments. much of the evidence Schwartz p rovides has diminished efficiency in proving his poin! t because debate defense can be found. He uses many of his personal opinions to help sway the readers view. His idea of an all-fat society does not seem logical collectible to projected consequences such as health risks and inefficiency. The writer overlooks many of these costs when trying to support his idea of making a common obese society. Criticizing the current treatments for obesity and weight divergence is not going to justify Schwartz?s views and opinions. Works CitedSchwartz, Hillel. Fat and Happy? Writing and Reading crosswise the Curriculum. ByLeonard J. Rosen and Laurence Behrens. New York: Longman, 2006. 380-86. If you ask to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper