Thank you people for your expert comments... here is another topic i chose to write on... please suggest improvements.
"Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health."
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.
====================================================================
The proponent of above argument tries to convince his audience that Saluda natural Spring water bottles are a healthy option for people. He uses the laboratory test findings and counts on the packaging location to claim that both could be the reasons why one should prefer Saluda over the rest. needless to say, his argument lacks a good foundation on many grounds. Let me explain how it fails on logical and statistical factors.
Firstly, the author claims the laboratory studies showing the water being free of bacteria and rich with minerals, logically this in no way corellates to the packaging quality of the bottles. Water might be clean, how does that explain the processing quality in packaging fatory. The author fails to touch upon this.
Secondly, one can logically find no corelation how the location of bottling factory depend on frequency of hospitalisation. first of all, not all the diseases are water borne. The author does not say anything about the cause of hospitalisation, couldn´t the hospitalization be because of 100% diptheria or measles case reported? Further, many of them could be viral or fungal diseases too. Morover, how intense is the disease when the resident is hospitalised? If a patient gets cured using antibiotics in the town, that does not totally evict the chances of water being contaminated.
Thirdly, the author has shown no statistical basis to prove his contention. What is the population of the city ? What age group gets sick ? How less is the above mentioned frequency of hospitalisation? Questions like these, tend to invite doubt upon the credibility of the argument.
In sum, one must agree that advertising is done for advertisement´s sake not for awareness ( unless they are government sponsored programs ), and one should not be swept away by the marketing gimmicks like this. He must acquire full statistical and logical reasoning before trying the product. Things like water bottles are very sensitive to contamination and one should be aware of the reputation and credibility of the product before trying. Consumer awareness brings market to justice.
"Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health."
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.
====================================================================
The proponent of above argument tries to convince his audience that Saluda natural Spring water bottles are a healthy option for people. He uses the laboratory test findings and counts on the packaging location to claim that both could be the reasons why one should prefer Saluda over the rest. needless to say, his argument lacks a good foundation on many grounds. Let me explain how it fails on logical and statistical factors.
Firstly, the author claims the laboratory studies showing the water being free of bacteria and rich with minerals, logically this in no way corellates to the packaging quality of the bottles. Water might be clean, how does that explain the processing quality in packaging fatory. The author fails to touch upon this.
Secondly, one can logically find no corelation how the location of bottling factory depend on frequency of hospitalisation. first of all, not all the diseases are water borne. The author does not say anything about the cause of hospitalisation, couldn´t the hospitalization be because of 100% diptheria or measles case reported? Further, many of them could be viral or fungal diseases too. Morover, how intense is the disease when the resident is hospitalised? If a patient gets cured using antibiotics in the town, that does not totally evict the chances of water being contaminated.
Thirdly, the author has shown no statistical basis to prove his contention. What is the population of the city ? What age group gets sick ? How less is the above mentioned frequency of hospitalisation? Questions like these, tend to invite doubt upon the credibility of the argument.
In sum, one must agree that advertising is done for advertisement´s sake not for awareness ( unless they are government sponsored programs ), and one should not be swept away by the marketing gimmicks like this. He must acquire full statistical and logical reasoning before trying the product. Things like water bottles are very sensitive to contamination and one should be aware of the reputation and credibility of the product before trying. Consumer awareness brings market to justice.
Nine-tenths of wisdom is being wise in time ~Theodore Roosevelt
