Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
Authors stance toward their source can be either objective or subjective. Haslers stance toward his source is objective because he selected informative and reliable sources when writing this article. He did not merely choose one or two sources that would support the idea that his article was an objective essay.
Discussion
As a result, he has provided facts as evidence instead of his own opinion. His selected words and details have expressed Haslers stance toward his texts. He included facts and explanations to back up the claims he made. Haslers choice of words shows how he wants readers to relate with him on this topic. Hasler used strong words when making arguments to create a neutral relationship with the readers. Hasler used precise words to support the articles main idea or help the reader understand what the writer is trying to say. Hasler used different sources from different dates and other writers to show that his article had more than one opinion.
The passage in the text in which Haslers stance is evident is on page 790. Hasler explains how he has tried to be objective with his sources, providing clues as to his stance on what ancient medicine does and does not do. When he says that there are challenges to the evidence for this claim, it means challenges exist for him as a writer to back up his claims (Bullock et al. 790). Hasler addresses his audience on both sides of this issue through his use of language. If he had spoken only in ancient terms, it would have been assumed that he was addressing only one side. Haslers evidence to support his claims in this report is the claim about ancient medicine not working.
Hasler provides facts from a reliable source; Hasler demonstrates how reliable his documentation is and reinforces his argument while also persuading the reader of its truthfulness. He has favored a specific side of the discussion on whether or not Ancient Medicine is preferable over modern medicine by using sentences that are more affectionate toward this idea as opposed to neutral in their content.
I have used Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, pages 737-746, and Women and American War Posters on by Reyna M. Coronado, pages 774 -784, to evaluate the source essay by looking at how the author presented their texts. The two readings consider the source essay by introducing it through words, not a personal opinion of how others should be doing something. For instance, the first reading explains how women were perceived during particular eras of time and how women should depict themselves by accepting the status quo. For example, the first reading correlates with how women affected world history during that era.
The second reading is a historical analysis, focusing on a specific era in world history, making it even more reliable. Coronados essay helps me know that women have been involved in various aspects of world history and affected how we see it. Based on two readings, the second reading defines a theme about womens history through different perspectives, such as the first reading, and also explains how women have affected world history. Thus, Haslers essay has been evaluated through reliable sources and can be used as evidence to support a particular idea.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the issue of the superiority of ancient medicine over modern is debated, and it may be classified according to specific criteria. For example, Hasler debated whether ancient or modern medicine is better from a historical perspective. He did this by looking at what was done during different eras in history and how it affected the development of both ancient and modern medicines. Therefore, Haslers claim that ancient medicine rarely worked is acceptable because this statement relates to history.
Work Cited
Bullock, Richard, et al. The Norton Field Guide to Writing with Readings. Sixth Edition.Norton & Company, 2022.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.