How One Doctor Changed Football Forever Bennet Omalu Uses good points throughout his article, never the less he has a few logical fallacies. Bennet adds hominem by saying “football is pointless, a lot of big fat guys running into each other” (Bennet). He is attacking the person instead of attacking the problem, he has to know how to go into situations without getting carried away from the little things that causes logical fallacies. The list goes on and on Mike Webster uses false analogy by stating he uses a taser it is going to heal his back pain, using a taser gun on your back is only going to make your back get worse. He also uses oversimplification making something big not seem like a big deal, “would zap himself unconsciousness just to put himself to sleep.” That is a big deal most people would get servilely injured, or some people can die from it depending on the number of zaps is used on a human body. It is not to be taken lightly, most…show more content… They need to stay focused on one point of view get the point out so that the audience can get a clear picture of what the story is about. If they change it up the audience will get lost throughout the article, those trivial things make an enormous difference in an essay that everyone needs to be aware of when they are doing some type of writing. There is also a slippery slope when he states that the guys running into each other will cause them to get hurt. It shows a terrific event that could occur if they continue to pursue with the event. Bennet must break it down specifically to know how running into each other can really hurt someone in which ways to get the reader to understand the
