-
bowleyjoo
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:41 am
- Location: Thailand
The following appeared in a corporate planning memorandum for a company that develops amusement parks:
“Because travel from our country to foreign countries has increased dramatically in recent years, our next project should be a ‘World Tour’ theme park with replicas of famous foreign buildings, rides that have international themes, and refreshment stands serving only foods from the country represented by the nearest ride. The best location would be near our capital city, which has large percentages of international residents and of children under the age of 16. Given the advantages of this site and the growing interest in foreign countries, the ‘World Tour’ theme park should be as successful as our space-travel theme park, where attendance has increased tenfold over the past decade.”
The author concludes that the “World Tour” theme park will definitely bring about the success to the company. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out the increased number of people who travel overseas in recent years. The international theme will serve the interest of customers as same as the space-travel theme park, another successful project of the company, can attract a large group of people. This argument, however, fails to be persuasive for the author’s weak analogy and questionable assumptions.
Most conspicuously, the author foresees the high number of participants in the world tour theme park on the flawed assumption that the world tour theme park can do the same as the space-travel theme park do. No evidence does the author use to buttress this assumption. The space-travel theme park enjoys the increased number of attendants in the past ten years because there is no other amusement park in the vicinity. Nevertheless, the author does not prove that the world-tour park has the same condition. Actually, the location of the world tour theme park which is in proximity of the capital discourages the high number of attendants because there are many kinds of entertaining activities in the big city. The world tour theme park has to attract customers from other entertainment industry, such as theatres, shopping malls, game centers, and so on. Therefore, if it fails to do so, the expectation of high number of participants to amusement parks is entirely unfounded.
Also, the author’s line of reasoning is based on the flawed assumption that the customers of the world-tour theme park are interested in traveling aboard. In fact, this is a dubious claim. Only the increased number of citizens taking trips to foreign countries in recent years is an insufficient ground to conclude the current trend of a large group of people. Possibly, people travel overseas because they would like to participate in Olympics or international music festivals held in other countries. In addition, the company’s prospective customers perhaps are not interested in the world-tour theme park at all because they are foreigners who prefer the local culture, and children who pay attention only on playing, rather than the theme and decoration of the amusement parks. If these are the case, then the author’s conclusion is greatly weakened.
In summary, this argument is unwarranted. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional evidences that everything that makes “Space-travel” theme park becomes successful would be applicable to the “World Tour” theme park. Furthermore, all the prospective customers of the “World Tour” theme park are truly interested in international travel. Most importantly, all the attractions which are planned to attract this group of customers are what the customers look for indeed. Without such evidences mentioned above, this argument remains logically unconvincing, and fails to persuade the readers.
“Because travel from our country to foreign countries has increased dramatically in recent years, our next project should be a ‘World Tour’ theme park with replicas of famous foreign buildings, rides that have international themes, and refreshment stands serving only foods from the country represented by the nearest ride. The best location would be near our capital city, which has large percentages of international residents and of children under the age of 16. Given the advantages of this site and the growing interest in foreign countries, the ‘World Tour’ theme park should be as successful as our space-travel theme park, where attendance has increased tenfold over the past decade.”
The author concludes that the “World Tour” theme park will definitely bring about the success to the company. To substantiate this conclusion, the author points out the increased number of people who travel overseas in recent years. The international theme will serve the interest of customers as same as the space-travel theme park, another successful project of the company, can attract a large group of people. This argument, however, fails to be persuasive for the author’s weak analogy and questionable assumptions.
Most conspicuously, the author foresees the high number of participants in the world tour theme park on the flawed assumption that the world tour theme park can do the same as the space-travel theme park do. No evidence does the author use to buttress this assumption. The space-travel theme park enjoys the increased number of attendants in the past ten years because there is no other amusement park in the vicinity. Nevertheless, the author does not prove that the world-tour park has the same condition. Actually, the location of the world tour theme park which is in proximity of the capital discourages the high number of attendants because there are many kinds of entertaining activities in the big city. The world tour theme park has to attract customers from other entertainment industry, such as theatres, shopping malls, game centers, and so on. Therefore, if it fails to do so, the expectation of high number of participants to amusement parks is entirely unfounded.
Also, the author’s line of reasoning is based on the flawed assumption that the customers of the world-tour theme park are interested in traveling aboard. In fact, this is a dubious claim. Only the increased number of citizens taking trips to foreign countries in recent years is an insufficient ground to conclude the current trend of a large group of people. Possibly, people travel overseas because they would like to participate in Olympics or international music festivals held in other countries. In addition, the company’s prospective customers perhaps are not interested in the world-tour theme park at all because they are foreigners who prefer the local culture, and children who pay attention only on playing, rather than the theme and decoration of the amusement parks. If these are the case, then the author’s conclusion is greatly weakened.
In summary, this argument is unwarranted. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional evidences that everything that makes “Space-travel” theme park becomes successful would be applicable to the “World Tour” theme park. Furthermore, all the prospective customers of the “World Tour” theme park are truly interested in international travel. Most importantly, all the attractions which are planned to attract this group of customers are what the customers look for indeed. Without such evidences mentioned above, this argument remains logically unconvincing, and fails to persuade the readers.
