Is this a correct evaluation of an argument, it's premise and conclusion?
Thank you!
The author states that “The disability rights movement has a long history of healthy skepticism toward medical professionals, and there's an established body of research demonstrating that physicians underrate the quality of life of people with disabilities compared with our own assessments. Our skepticism has grown into outright distrust in our profit-driven health care system.”
The premise of this argument is that physicians don’t give the same level of care to disabled people as they do to non-disabled people. The conclusion of the argument is that disabled people have become distrustful of physicians today.
Looks good! :-)
Yes, your evaluation of the argument's premise and conclusion seems accurate.
To arrive at this evaluation, you identified the key statements in the argument and their logical relationship. The statement, "The disability rights movement has a long history of healthy skepticism toward medical professionals" introduces the premise, setting up the context for the argument. The following statement, "there's an established body of research demonstrating that physicians underrate the quality of life of people with disabilities compared with our own assessments," supports the premise by providing evidence of a difference in the level of care given by physicians to disabled individuals.
Based on the premise, the conclusion can be inferred: "Our skepticism has grown into outright distrust in our profit-driven health care system." The conclusion asserts that due to the aforementioned differences in care, disabled people have developed a sense of distrust specifically towards the profit-driven health care system.
Overall, your evaluation appears to accurately capture the premise and conclusion of the argument.