Thanks for viewing my post, feel free to give me feedback on any of the essays. If you just want to give feedback on one that's fine, don't want to be too greedy
!=========================================ESSAY 1==============================================
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a print advertisement for a dietary supplement:
"According to a recent study, professional bodybuilders who used Train & Gain, a new protein supplement, over the course of three months experienced an increase in measured strength of up to 20%. Since Train & Gain is now available without prescription at all major pharmacies, superior results are no longer limited to professional athletes. Try Train & Gain today and you too can boost your strength and achieve professional-level performance in just a few months."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
Train & Gain's argument about increasing strength up to 20% over the course of three months is unsupported. Their is no mention of how Train & Gain works. Does Train & Gain increase measured strength simply by taking the supplement or is it a supplement taken to help increase strength gained when working out? Their argument fails to provide any evidence of effectiveness among a randomized study group. Their study group of professional bodybuilders saw an increase in measured strength. This study has two major flaws. One flaw is the lack of a control group. There is no mention of how the control group measured when it came to increases in strength after three months without Train & Gain. Another flaw would be the lack of guidelines that were stated for this study. Was the study group allowed to work out during their three month trial? If they were allowed to work out, was the routine the same for each person, and how many hours was each person suppose to work out per day? With no control group to compare their study group to, there would be no solid evidence that the increase in strength came from Train & Gain and not some outlying factor.
This new protein supplement is being marketed to all clientele and not just professional bodybuilders. Train & Gain assume that their clientele will have the same work ethic as those of a professional bodybuilder. Since their is no study for how Train & Gain affect a demographic of non professional bodybuilders, evidence may arise that shows how Train & Gain does not increase strength in those that take the supplement because they do not have a consistent work out habit.
Train & Gain can strengthen their argument by provided two study groups. One group will consist of a randomized demographic who work out a set amount of hours a week while not taking Train & Gain, and the other group will also follow the same guidelines but take the daily allotment of Train & Gain that is set. The study will show the affects of Train & Gain on the clientele they are marketing to.
=========================================ESSAY 2==============================================
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in an article in a human resources magazine:
"Six months ago, in an experiment aimed at boosting worker productivity, Company Z started providing free gourmet lunches to its employees. The Company hoped that these office lunches would encourage employees to remain in the building during lunch-hour and motivate employees to work harder throughout the day. A survey found that soon after the lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked by most Company Z employees increased dramatically. During this same period, the Company's profits also increased substantially. Thus, it is safe to say that the lunch program was a huge success and that Company Z should make the program permanent."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument is stating that Company Z's increase in profits is due to them providing lunch to their employees. There is not enough evidence to support this implied relationship. The first assumption is that workers will stay in the building if given free lunch. There is no evidence stating that this is how employees will react to the free lunch. To test this assumption, the Company should have two groups of randomized employees: one group will not be given lunch and one group will be given lunch. Over a set time period, the test will measure how many employees leave the building while how many stayed inside for lunch. This study will provide better evidence for a relation between providing lunch and more people staying in the office.
The next assumption that is made is that providing a gourmet lunch to the employees will result in harder working employees. This assumption is flawed in many ways. Employees given free food can eat too much which then results in tiredness the rest of the work day. Food is the fuel for humans, however most employees will still be eating food whether they have to bring it or they are given it for free.
The next two arguments that this passage makes is after this lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked and the Company's profit both increased substantially. There could be many outside factors that can counter these two arguments. Company Z could have implemented a new rule that required each worker to work X hours a day, when before each worker was only working Y hours a day, given X > Y . Another big counter argument could be during the time that the lunch program was implemented, Company Z was also rolling out a new product. This product was greatly anticipated by the public and the product's sales increased the Company's profits dramatically.
Some additional evidence is needed to strengthen this argument. This argument lacks a controlled environment which can result to outside factors affecting the study. This study needs to dictate that there are no changes in work policy, no introduction of new products, no changes to the economy, and no new changes to the market that this Company is a part of.
=========================================ESSAY 3==============================================
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a national news magazine:
"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
I agree with the author that the gaming industry should have an independent party oversee their rating system. However, the author can improve his argument by assuming less , being more neutral, and having more evidence support his claims. The author states that the electronic game rating system is not working. To who is it not working for? A survey or a poll taken about whether the rating system for electronic games is correct would be a good way to support this argument. The author then goes on to state that the fines for having an incorrect rating is nominal. Every individual has a different gauge of whether a fine is considered nominal. The actual quantity of the fine or some sort of comparison can help the reader gauge how small the fines really are.
In the author's conclusion he says , "companies that knowingly violate". This phrase is too open to interpretation. If a company says they did not knowingly rate the game wrong but accidentally rated it something different , will they be punished? Also is the independent party following a particular set of guidelines for seeing if a gaming company incorrectly rates the game or is it different for each game that comes out on market. There should be a comprehensive set of guidelines that are published to the public. These guidelines will state how the contents of each games should be rated. This way there is no confusion about what the gaming company versus what the independent party think a particular rating means.
