Topic:
'The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: "Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstrates how using our internet services can increase your profitability."'
Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
My Essay:
The above argument states that profitability can increase by using an internet advertising company. Argument is based on Furniture Depot a 10% increase in sales since it employed the internet advertising company. However, argument relies on assumptions without clear evidence. As a result, argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, argument is based on one example: Furniture Depot. We cannot assume that if their internet services were effective in the case of Furniture Depot, then their services are successful all the time. One might actually wonder why they offered only one example. For example, if the company was really doing a great job with their online advertising, then they should have given the average percentage by which the profitability of their clients have increased since they helped them.
Second, we do not know if besides engaging online advertisement, Furniture Depot has taken addition steps to increase their sales. For example, they might have some advertising on television, radio, reduce their prices, offer better customer service, offer installation services, etc. Eventually, the 10% increase in sales might be the result of a combination of strategies used by Furniture Depot. As a result, the services offered by the online advertisement company could be just one small part of the 10% increase.
Therefore, this argument does leave room for improvement. In company's appeal to businesses, besides giving one example, they could mention a few more other examples where the profitability increased as a result of their services. This would increase their credibility. The examples should be from different industries. Since they offered the Furniture Depot as their sole example, one might assume that they are specialized in furniture industry. Examples from various industries would show that they are able to work with various companies. In this way the company will appeal to more business segments.
In conclusion, I want to reinstate that argument has serious flaws, which will probably put in jeopardy their goal of attracting more clients. But it could be improved if company would show more positive results in past. With a single example of success, argument remains open for debate.
Thank you very much!
'The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: "Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstrates how using our internet services can increase your profitability."'
Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
My Essay:
The above argument states that profitability can increase by using an internet advertising company. Argument is based on Furniture Depot a 10% increase in sales since it employed the internet advertising company. However, argument relies on assumptions without clear evidence. As a result, argument is weak and has several flaws.
First, argument is based on one example: Furniture Depot. We cannot assume that if their internet services were effective in the case of Furniture Depot, then their services are successful all the time. One might actually wonder why they offered only one example. For example, if the company was really doing a great job with their online advertising, then they should have given the average percentage by which the profitability of their clients have increased since they helped them.
Second, we do not know if besides engaging online advertisement, Furniture Depot has taken addition steps to increase their sales. For example, they might have some advertising on television, radio, reduce their prices, offer better customer service, offer installation services, etc. Eventually, the 10% increase in sales might be the result of a combination of strategies used by Furniture Depot. As a result, the services offered by the online advertisement company could be just one small part of the 10% increase.
Therefore, this argument does leave room for improvement. In company's appeal to businesses, besides giving one example, they could mention a few more other examples where the profitability increased as a result of their services. This would increase their credibility. The examples should be from different industries. Since they offered the Furniture Depot as their sole example, one might assume that they are specialized in furniture industry. Examples from various industries would show that they are able to work with various companies. In this way the company will appeal to more business segments.
In conclusion, I want to reinstate that argument has serious flaws, which will probably put in jeopardy their goal of attracting more clients. But it could be improved if company would show more positive results in past. With a single example of success, argument remains open for debate.
Thank you very much!
