The Andromeda Strain

The argument

You should read The Andromeda Strain while self-isolating from the coronavirus because it shares similarities to current events. Readers will find that the story shares similarities to the pandemic that they are facing. The book captures the possibilities of the outcome of the pandemic and how society should respond to the crisis. Underneath the fictional disease, the reader can recognize the human response and the dangers of overreacting in a crisis. People should also read The Andromeda Strain because it provides a realistic interpretation of government and scientist responses. Michael Crichton does not create a completely incompetent team of people to deal with the virus, nor does he fabricate a team that knows exactly how to deal with the virus. Crichton creates a realistic team of people that are flawed in nature. This reminds the reader to examine all the thoughts and actions surrounding the coronavirus to ensure that they are listening to valid information, understanding that there are still unknowns. The Andromeda Strain is also a great quarantine read because it reminds readers to distinguish fact from fiction. Although the pandemic has caused stress and anxiety throughout the world, the book reminds readers that there are still limits to the coronavirus. The Andromeda Strain is built upon the premise of an unknown bacteria from Mars coming to Earth and mutating beyond anyone’s control. The book reassures readers that even though they live in a pandemic, the nature of the coronavirus is much more predictable as more information is collected over time.

Premises

Counter-arguments

This argument is based on the assumption that people want to dwell on the realities of the pandemic. This can lead to fear and apprehension about the future. Some readers would rather read books that do not focus on disease and pandemics. In addition, without being properly informed on diseases such as the coronavirus, the reader may not be able to distinguish between fact and fiction in the novel. This could lead to the reader becoming overwhelmed by the unknowns of the coronavirus.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The novel concerns an extraterrestrial micro-organism contained by a small team in a sealed facility. Its resemblance to a global respiratory pandemic is thematic at best, and the premise never says what a reader would actually take from it. [Rejecting P2] "The dangers of overreacting" is one reading of the novel, and a contestable one, since the containment effort is what averts catastrophe in the book. Presenting an interpretation as a lesson the reader will draw is not support for the recommendation. [Rejecting P3] A convincing portrayal of fallible scientists is a literary virtue, not evidence about how governments and scientists behave, and the counter-argument raises the obvious hazard: a reader without background may take the novel's detail for fact. The conclusion also does not follow from the premises, since a book resembling current events is a reason some readers would avoid it — which is what the sibling positions recommending lighter reading make explicit.