-
bertrand1984
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:46 am
- Location: Paris
Please give me an honest rate !
Thanks a lot
"Reelect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state's economy. Over the ast year alone, 70 percent of the state's worker have had increase in their wages, 5000 new jobs have been created, and 6 corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economyis likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected."
Though it may seem at first glance that the state’s economy will continue to improve if Adams is reelected, a closer examination of the argument presented in the passage reveals numerous examples of leaps of faith, poor reasoning, and ill-defined terminology. Indeed, there are several questionable assumptions, resulting in a logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premise concerning the last year state’s economy results is debatable, and thus results in questionable assumptions. In a weak attempt to support its claim, the argument gives several figures. Firstly, if it can be noted that 70 percent of the state’s workers have had increase in their wages, a validation of the stated conclusion necessitates evidence that such an increase did not appear in comparable states. Most conspicuously, the argument does not address the cause of this increase: without evidence that this increase is due to Adams’s policy, the argument fails to prove Adams’s leadership in improving the state economy. Moreover, the others figures given by the author are not convincing : if 5000 new jobs have been created last year, we don’t know how many job have disappeared on the same period and we need more information in order to be able to consider this statistic as a success. The mention that 6 corporations have located their headquarters on the state provides scant evidence that Adams was a good leader for the state’s economy. However, neither of these statistics as presented really do much to bolster the author’s claim.
The author’s second premise , pertaining to the fact that a recent poll reveals that the economy is likely to improve if Adams is reelected, may be valid, if it can be proven that people who answered to the poll are state’s economy specialists. Consequently, yet another weakness in the argument is the failure to account for people not competent to give a pertinent opinion on the state’s economy.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not persuasive. In order to make the argument more thorough, the author would have to demonstrate that the assumptions discussed above are, in fact, true and relevant. Thus, evidence supporting how the results of state’s economy were especially good in the past years and to what extent these results are due to Adams’s policy would tighten the link between the premises and conclusion, nmaking the reasoning more sound.
Thanks a lot
"Reelect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state's economy. Over the ast year alone, 70 percent of the state's worker have had increase in their wages, 5000 new jobs have been created, and 6 corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economyis likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected."
Though it may seem at first glance that the state’s economy will continue to improve if Adams is reelected, a closer examination of the argument presented in the passage reveals numerous examples of leaps of faith, poor reasoning, and ill-defined terminology. Indeed, there are several questionable assumptions, resulting in a logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premise concerning the last year state’s economy results is debatable, and thus results in questionable assumptions. In a weak attempt to support its claim, the argument gives several figures. Firstly, if it can be noted that 70 percent of the state’s workers have had increase in their wages, a validation of the stated conclusion necessitates evidence that such an increase did not appear in comparable states. Most conspicuously, the argument does not address the cause of this increase: without evidence that this increase is due to Adams’s policy, the argument fails to prove Adams’s leadership in improving the state economy. Moreover, the others figures given by the author are not convincing : if 5000 new jobs have been created last year, we don’t know how many job have disappeared on the same period and we need more information in order to be able to consider this statistic as a success. The mention that 6 corporations have located their headquarters on the state provides scant evidence that Adams was a good leader for the state’s economy. However, neither of these statistics as presented really do much to bolster the author’s claim.
The author’s second premise , pertaining to the fact that a recent poll reveals that the economy is likely to improve if Adams is reelected, may be valid, if it can be proven that people who answered to the poll are state’s economy specialists. Consequently, yet another weakness in the argument is the failure to account for people not competent to give a pertinent opinion on the state’s economy.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not persuasive. In order to make the argument more thorough, the author would have to demonstrate that the assumptions discussed above are, in fact, true and relevant. Thus, evidence supporting how the results of state’s economy were especially good in the past years and to what extent these results are due to Adams’s policy would tighten the link between the premises and conclusion, nmaking the reasoning more sound.
