Family Friendly Restaurant needs to improve its facility to remain competitive in our city ’ s restaurant market. Mega-Family Restaurant, recently opened in a suburb of our city, offers a video arcade, fine wood furniture, and seven big-screen televisions. Due to a recession in our town, people report having less discretionary income for eating out. Therefore, if we are to hold our share of a shrinking restaurant market, we need to offer at least all of the features of Mega-Family Restaurant. ”
Discuss how well-reasoned you find the above 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 author ’ s thinking and what alternative explanations or counter-examples 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 to better evaluate its conclusion.
The Arguments states that family friendly restaurant needs to improve new facilities comparable to mega family resutaurant to retain in competitive resturant market of the city. The given evidence that mega family restaurant offers new features like video arcade, fine wood furniture and seven big screen televisions. The author also mentioned about the recession in the town and people have less income to go out for eating out. However, there are many several assuptions that are not applying to this argument . In the absense of any strong evidence in support the argument is not very persuasive to me.
Firstly, If the spending money to improve the restaurant facilities will attract the people who are already in recession and having less money for going out . How will this work is not explain properly ? For example if family friendly resturant spent $500,000 to improve all the facilies such as to make alike mega family resturant . Then, the restaurant will have the same feature alike with new resturant opened in suburb area. Now, how the same features will help in retaining customers.
Secondaly, the author does not mention the most important criteria for choosing resturant is the facilities or any other thing else like the good quality of food and varities of food at cheap rates etc,may be location is criteria for most people such as they give preference to the location not the facilties .The Author fails to provide the enough information to support the argument successfully.
Also, the author does not mention any survey of people choice and what they look for when they go out for food with all prevailing poor economic conditions in city.
The Author should provide the evidence as the old facilites of the resutrant is loosing thier excisting customers and he did the survey of market and find that customers only prefer other resturant due to only one reason of lack of facilites in this restuarant.
To sum up, in absence of any strong reason how the facilities changes in resturant will help in keep holding thier customer . Hence, this argument was not logical represented .
Discuss how well-reasoned you find the above 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 author ’ s thinking and what alternative explanations or counter-examples 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 to better evaluate its conclusion.
The Arguments states that family friendly restaurant needs to improve new facilities comparable to mega family resutaurant to retain in competitive resturant market of the city. The given evidence that mega family restaurant offers new features like video arcade, fine wood furniture and seven big screen televisions. The author also mentioned about the recession in the town and people have less income to go out for eating out. However, there are many several assuptions that are not applying to this argument . In the absense of any strong evidence in support the argument is not very persuasive to me.
Firstly, If the spending money to improve the restaurant facilities will attract the people who are already in recession and having less money for going out . How will this work is not explain properly ? For example if family friendly resturant spent $500,000 to improve all the facilies such as to make alike mega family resturant . Then, the restaurant will have the same feature alike with new resturant opened in suburb area. Now, how the same features will help in retaining customers.
Secondaly, the author does not mention the most important criteria for choosing resturant is the facilities or any other thing else like the good quality of food and varities of food at cheap rates etc,may be location is criteria for most people such as they give preference to the location not the facilties .The Author fails to provide the enough information to support the argument successfully.
Also, the author does not mention any survey of people choice and what they look for when they go out for food with all prevailing poor economic conditions in city.
The Author should provide the evidence as the old facilites of the resutrant is loosing thier excisting customers and he did the survey of market and find that customers only prefer other resturant due to only one reason of lack of facilites in this restuarant.
To sum up, in absence of any strong reason how the facilities changes in resturant will help in keep holding thier customer . Hence, this argument was not logical represented .
