My conclusion is that addiction is not a disease; however growing influences in society have led us to believe addiction as a disease which is harmful and has complex results for the society. I think it as the main conclusion because the passage is about addiction as a disease model becoming socially accepted as a norm. The passage has premises supporting the conclusion. The passage explains that addiction should not be considered a disease. The author …show more content…
The author does not define of what he means by disease and thus the meaning is not clear. He does not explain of what he means by disease so I am going to use the principle of charity because there is no indication that he means anything different than what is commonly understood and meant by disease as abnormal functioning of the human body. I reconstructed this meaning because the author discusses addicts suffering physiologically and thus having chemical and physical side effects on their bodies. The concept "disease" is used in a sense too narrow. The author should have given an example or definition of disease that could have led us to understand the concept in more detail. The concept "disease" is used four times in the passage and there is no evidence that the word changes meaning. Now I have finished with the key