analysis of argument second topic.please anyone do suggest me and have a look at my both the essays
The following appeared in a trade publication for the insurance industry:
"Each generation of Americans has lived longer that the ones preceding it, as the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in recent years. The progress of medical technology shows no sign of abating. Therefore, we can confidently predict that most children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument above states that most children born in america in the next decade will live past the age of ninety omits some important concerns that must be addressed to substantiate the argument and therefore fails to be persuasive.
first, the argument assumes an analogy by comparing situation in the past to the present.The argument assumes that since the age of americans living longer increased in the past hence it is sure to increase in the future and they would have a life expectancy greater than their ancestors.The argument ignores the fact the generation of americans have lived longer and they are applying this particular fact to a small group of people(i.e.children). The argument does not cite any specific cause to prove his point that why there has been a rise in expectancy of americans.The argument shows that the only possible cause for rise in life expectancy may be due to rapid advancement in medical technology.There might be some other alternative causes for increase in life expectancy.for instance the number of infant deaths in america might have sharpened but the number of elderly deaths might have declined leading to rise in life expectancy.
second, the argument fails to address any statistical evidence to prove his stance by showing that there has been increase in the number of people living longer.the argument fails to provide any facts or figures to show whether there has been an increase in the age of people who live longer.
Because, the argument ignores out several key issues it fails to be logically convincing.The evidence in support of the conclusion does little to prove the conclusion that most children will live past the age of ninety because it ignores the assumptions already raised above. The argument would have been strengthened if it included the reasons responsible for a rise in life expectancy,showed proper facts and figures mentioning that there has been an increase in the number of people living longer
The following appeared in a trade publication for the insurance industry:
"Each generation of Americans has lived longer that the ones preceding it, as the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in recent years. The progress of medical technology shows no sign of abating. Therefore, we can confidently predict that most children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument above states that most children born in america in the next decade will live past the age of ninety omits some important concerns that must be addressed to substantiate the argument and therefore fails to be persuasive.
first, the argument assumes an analogy by comparing situation in the past to the present.The argument assumes that since the age of americans living longer increased in the past hence it is sure to increase in the future and they would have a life expectancy greater than their ancestors.The argument ignores the fact the generation of americans have lived longer and they are applying this particular fact to a small group of people(i.e.children). The argument does not cite any specific cause to prove his point that why there has been a rise in expectancy of americans.The argument shows that the only possible cause for rise in life expectancy may be due to rapid advancement in medical technology.There might be some other alternative causes for increase in life expectancy.for instance the number of infant deaths in america might have sharpened but the number of elderly deaths might have declined leading to rise in life expectancy.
second, the argument fails to address any statistical evidence to prove his stance by showing that there has been increase in the number of people living longer.the argument fails to provide any facts or figures to show whether there has been an increase in the age of people who live longer.
Because, the argument ignores out several key issues it fails to be logically convincing.The evidence in support of the conclusion does little to prove the conclusion that most children will live past the age of ninety because it ignores the assumptions already raised above. The argument would have been strengthened if it included the reasons responsible for a rise in life expectancy,showed proper facts and figures mentioning that there has been an increase in the number of people living longer
