"The producers of the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely to maximize their profits if they are willing to pay Robin Good several million dollars to star in it
- even though that amount is far more than any other person involved with the movie will make. After all, Robin has in the past been paid a similar amount to work in
several films that were very financially successful."
In the preceding argument the author claims that the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely profit maximzing if the producers of this movie are willing to pay Robin Good
several million dollars to star in the movie. Though this might be an outcome, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument. Based on a questionable premise and several flawed
assumptions, we cannot accept this statement as valid.
The primary issue with the author's argument is its unsubstantiated premise. The author states that if Robin Good is the star in this movie it will be financially successful. Only because
Robin Good acted in several films other than 3003 and these other films were successful doesn't mean that this must be the case this time. If we assume that 3003 is an action movie
but the actor named above is known for as the most romantic newcomer, this would certainly call the authors premise into question.Taken this premise alone for the basis of his argument, the author lacks any legitemite support for his conclusion.
In addition to the unsubstantiated premise stated above, the author weakens his argument by making several assumptions that remain unproven. The author assumes that if Robin Good
will star in this movie, other actors won't feel intimidated and as a consequence wouldn't participate. Another assumtion is that the author believes that the movies in which Robin
Good acted were successful because of him. He doesn't consider other factors playing a role. What if the actor played in movies that starred famous Hollywood actors, in this case it
is very doubtful to believe that it is only Robin Goods achievement that these movies were financially successful.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumtions, we cannot say that his argument is completely without a base. If the author would clarify why Robin
Good will be the key to make the film a financial successful one, he could strenghten his position enormously. If the author stated that 3003 is an action movie and Robin Good is known and loved
for his great action movies his premise would be more trustworthy. Also if the argument would state that the previous movies of Robin Good were movies in which he was the star and participated with
unknown actors, this would strenghen the authors assumption. There are several issues that need to be clarified in order to accept the autors reasoning, but with a little research and clarification
the author could strenghen his position tremendously.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on weak premises and flawed assumptions that render his argument invalid. If the authors hopes to convince the readers from his point of
view he needs to restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic and provide better support for his statements.
- even though that amount is far more than any other person involved with the movie will make. After all, Robin has in the past been paid a similar amount to work in
several films that were very financially successful."
In the preceding argument the author claims that the forthcoming movie 3003 will be most likely profit maximzing if the producers of this movie are willing to pay Robin Good
several million dollars to star in the movie. Though this might be an outcome, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument. Based on a questionable premise and several flawed
assumptions, we cannot accept this statement as valid.
The primary issue with the author's argument is its unsubstantiated premise. The author states that if Robin Good is the star in this movie it will be financially successful. Only because
Robin Good acted in several films other than 3003 and these other films were successful doesn't mean that this must be the case this time. If we assume that 3003 is an action movie
but the actor named above is known for as the most romantic newcomer, this would certainly call the authors premise into question.Taken this premise alone for the basis of his argument, the author lacks any legitemite support for his conclusion.
In addition to the unsubstantiated premise stated above, the author weakens his argument by making several assumptions that remain unproven. The author assumes that if Robin Good
will star in this movie, other actors won't feel intimidated and as a consequence wouldn't participate. Another assumtion is that the author believes that the movies in which Robin
Good acted were successful because of him. He doesn't consider other factors playing a role. What if the actor played in movies that starred famous Hollywood actors, in this case it
is very doubtful to believe that it is only Robin Goods achievement that these movies were financially successful.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumtions, we cannot say that his argument is completely without a base. If the author would clarify why Robin
Good will be the key to make the film a financial successful one, he could strenghten his position enormously. If the author stated that 3003 is an action movie and Robin Good is known and loved
for his great action movies his premise would be more trustworthy. Also if the argument would state that the previous movies of Robin Good were movies in which he was the star and participated with
unknown actors, this would strenghen the authors assumption. There are several issues that need to be clarified in order to accept the autors reasoning, but with a little research and clarification
the author could strenghen his position tremendously.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on weak premises and flawed assumptions that render his argument invalid. If the authors hopes to convince the readers from his point of
view he needs to restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic and provide better support for his statements.
