Is addiction a disease? This question has been debated upon for several years yet a final conclusion was never made. In the passage "Ain't Misbehavin'", Stanley Peele argues that addiction is not a disease since it has never been proved to be it. He tries to support his point by stating general differences between addictions and diseases and defending other authors' statements. He says that if addiction is accepted as a disease then it creates a world where anything could be excusable. However, his claims are confusing and do not have enough supporting points to understand the concept better. Stanley Peele starts his argument by disagreeing to the statement that says most people in America believe that addiction is a disease. Yet, he fails to provide a reason for his disagreement. Hence, it is hard to accept his conclusion due to insufficient reasons and unsatisfactory arguments.
Stanley Peele's starts his main argument appealing to authority.
English: Boston Red Sox Cap Logo
The Boston Red Sox of Major League Baseball (Unite...
2001 Tampa Bay Devil Rays seasonHe states that Governor Dukakis puts addiction as "a sickness" since addicts suffer from a physiologically well defined phenomenon. However, it is uncertain that addiction is a medical condition since it has not been proven. Basically, Stanley Peel says that addiction is not a disease since there is not proof to support that declaration. Such argument like this is certainly an appeal to ignorance. The author has to note here that his attempt to prove addiction is not a disease has been inconclusive too. He fails to say why addiction should not be considered as a disease. Opposing other authors' point of views or statements to prove his claims are right does not necessarily prove his argument to be true. Thus, Stanley Peele should have included, in his passage, how an addiction itself is different form a disease. He could have used examples to prove...