A Rhetorical Analysis Of Ecotherapy

People have always known that nature can certainly improve mental health, but the new science of ecotherapy is proving just how beneficial nature really can be in all kinds of healing. Ecotherapy is the practice of using the natural world as a kind of therapy, for both mental and physical healing. James Hamblin in “The Nature Cure” and Oliver James in “Ecotherapy: how does the great outdoor improve mental health?” both agree that ecotherapy can be beneficial, and express that view through two different rhetorical strategies. They were both effective in how they explained their theses, with Hamblin appealing to logic and science, and James appealing to emotion and anecdotal evidence, but James did a better job at speaking to the average person.

Hamblin does not ever explicitly state his thesis or any firm opinion, instead going back and forth between seeing the evidence that supports ecotherapy and having doubts about it. He leans enough towards supporting ecotherapy for the thesis to be understood, but it could have been stated in a better and clearer way. In the second article, James’ thesis is very clearly stated as the last sentence; “Ecotherapies work because they reconnect us with nature… [and] our inner natures.” James presented his thesis in a better way by directly stating it instead of skirting around it like Hamblin did. James did a much better job in expressing his

Hamblin incorporates his evidence all through his article, using mostly logical and scientific sources to back his thesis: “A 2015 study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reported that walking in a park reduced blood flow to a part of the brain that the researchers claimed was typically associated with brooding. And in one of the most famous studies on the topic, patients recovering from gallbladder surgery healed faster and with fewer complications when their room looked out on trees rather than a wall,” (Hamblin, paragraph 15). James, on the other hand, uses more personal, anecdotal evidence. His evidence comes only from his own experiences in nature; “The experience of having to fend for ourselves certainly created a solidarity. The strongest memory I have is of successfully starting a fire by rubbing sticks together, enabling us to cook some baked beans,” (James, paragraph 6), and from a leading figure in ecotherapy who supplies an explanation on why ecotherapy is effective. James’ evidence is not scientific or concrete in the way Hamblin’s is, but is effective in its own way. Hamblin appeals to logic, and James appeals to emotion. Both authors use good evidence and sources that are