ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year."
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.
MY RESPONSE
The proposal given for the high school`s fundraising event is not only flawed but also inconclusive as it relies on certain vague assumptions.
At first,the proposal aims of increasing the thrill factor by doubling the size of a ferris wheel.This may entertain the students to a greater extent as compared to their parents. Higher the size of the wheel, higher the risk and adventure. Some parents would not find it entertaining enough to come to the fundraiser just because the size of the wheel has been doubled.
Secondly,the proposal aims of awarding more expensive prizes and wants food stalls to showcase a variety of international dishes.This will increase the cost of the fundraising.As a result, the organizers will have to increase the entrance fee to a similar extent.This may not go well with parents.As general law of economics goes, increase in price of non-essential goods leads to a decrease in demand.Hence, some parents may not be in a position to come to the fundraiser itself.Therefore,more data needs to be collected highlighting the income levels of the people who are planning to attend the fundraiser and the likely effect of increase in entrance fee on their donation.Also data regarding their tastes and preferences of fun activities and international cuisine may further help in evaluating the argument.
Increase in the cost of entrance fee also has a negative effect.This is so because,a person may eventually donate a lesser amount due to the extra cost which he had to bear in the form of entrance fee.Thus, this would indirectly harm the ultimate goal of the event, i.e maximizing the donation.
The argument makes a false assumption that their revenue from commission will increase from the vendors` revenues.However,here it assumes that same or even more number of people will attend the fundraiser.The argument also provides no concrete evidence of happening such an event making the assumption dubious.
Therefore,the argument can be strengthened if,additional information as mentioned above is provided.However,as it stands,the conclusion is seriously flawed for the reasons stated.
Thanks in Advance !!
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year."
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.
MY RESPONSE
The proposal given for the high school`s fundraising event is not only flawed but also inconclusive as it relies on certain vague assumptions.
At first,the proposal aims of increasing the thrill factor by doubling the size of a ferris wheel.This may entertain the students to a greater extent as compared to their parents. Higher the size of the wheel, higher the risk and adventure. Some parents would not find it entertaining enough to come to the fundraiser just because the size of the wheel has been doubled.
Secondly,the proposal aims of awarding more expensive prizes and wants food stalls to showcase a variety of international dishes.This will increase the cost of the fundraising.As a result, the organizers will have to increase the entrance fee to a similar extent.This may not go well with parents.As general law of economics goes, increase in price of non-essential goods leads to a decrease in demand.Hence, some parents may not be in a position to come to the fundraiser itself.Therefore,more data needs to be collected highlighting the income levels of the people who are planning to attend the fundraiser and the likely effect of increase in entrance fee on their donation.Also data regarding their tastes and preferences of fun activities and international cuisine may further help in evaluating the argument.
Increase in the cost of entrance fee also has a negative effect.This is so because,a person may eventually donate a lesser amount due to the extra cost which he had to bear in the form of entrance fee.Thus, this would indirectly harm the ultimate goal of the event, i.e maximizing the donation.
The argument makes a false assumption that their revenue from commission will increase from the vendors` revenues.However,here it assumes that same or even more number of people will attend the fundraiser.The argument also provides no concrete evidence of happening such an event making the assumption dubious.
Therefore,the argument can be strengthened if,additional information as mentioned above is provided.However,as it stands,the conclusion is seriously flawed for the reasons stated.
Thanks in Advance !!
