ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in an article in a consumer-electronics magazine:
"Company X's latest model of digital camera to be released next month, the TR12, is being promoted as the most portable, user-friendly digital camera available, and also an excellent bargain. It can be expected to live up to these claims, because Company X's previous model, the TR11, was universally lauded as setting the standard in these areas 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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The article argues that if we were to go by past experience of market response to one of Company X's products, then we can predict favourably about the qualities of a yet-to-be-released product from the company. One may be tempted to make such a favourable conclusion about Company X's latest model of digital camera, but the reasoning towards such a conclusion is not pragmatic, in fact flawed.
Firstly, in order to predict whether the new product TR12 would be the most portable, user-friendly camera available, it would be necessary to state the benchmark for it and compare potential features of it with the benchmark. If the benchmark were Company X's previous model, the TR11, then it is important to compare the TR12 with its features, to draw conclusions about the difference in worth of the models, and thereby present some credibility in arguing it could be a very superior product.
Secondly, supporting evidence in the form of what is the track record of the quality of Company X's products (barring one) has not been provided. This sort of evidence is important to establish, with some statistical significance, the ability of Company X to produce quality products - in other words, to be able to arrive at a generalised conclusion about its capabilities. In the absence of such evidence, or any indication that the TR12 may be a logical successor to TR11 or an improvement over it, it is not appropriate to reason that because TR11 was good, TR12 is also bound to be good.
Thirdly, the underlying assumption in the argument is that there are no other companies out there that are producing any good cameras. If it came to be known that there is another company Y that is also producing a new camera that is even more superior to what company X may be able to produce, then the TR12 will simply not be the most portable and user-friendly camera that will be released. Moreover, company X may itself be producing another camera that has all the stated qualities that is even better than TR12; or, TR12 may just be an improvement over TR11, giving minor enhancements in quality - which is not enough to establish it as the most portable and user-friendly in the market.
In essence, the argument is flawed for three reasons - lack of a benchmark to compare with, lack of statistical and historical evidence about the quality of company X's products, and lack of a fuller view of all the products being produced in the market by other such companies as company X. What could make the conclusion tenable is presenting features of TR12 vis-a-vis other old and new products in the market, a thorough analysis of company X's success rate with quality of its products, and a clear description of the meaning of 'most portable' and 'user-friendly' in addition to providing a comparison of camera prices.
The following appeared in an article in a consumer-electronics magazine:
"Company X's latest model of digital camera to be released next month, the TR12, is being promoted as the most portable, user-friendly digital camera available, and also an excellent bargain. It can be expected to live up to these claims, because Company X's previous model, the TR11, was universally lauded as setting the standard in these areas 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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The article argues that if we were to go by past experience of market response to one of Company X's products, then we can predict favourably about the qualities of a yet-to-be-released product from the company. One may be tempted to make such a favourable conclusion about Company X's latest model of digital camera, but the reasoning towards such a conclusion is not pragmatic, in fact flawed.
Firstly, in order to predict whether the new product TR12 would be the most portable, user-friendly camera available, it would be necessary to state the benchmark for it and compare potential features of it with the benchmark. If the benchmark were Company X's previous model, the TR11, then it is important to compare the TR12 with its features, to draw conclusions about the difference in worth of the models, and thereby present some credibility in arguing it could be a very superior product.
Secondly, supporting evidence in the form of what is the track record of the quality of Company X's products (barring one) has not been provided. This sort of evidence is important to establish, with some statistical significance, the ability of Company X to produce quality products - in other words, to be able to arrive at a generalised conclusion about its capabilities. In the absence of such evidence, or any indication that the TR12 may be a logical successor to TR11 or an improvement over it, it is not appropriate to reason that because TR11 was good, TR12 is also bound to be good.
Thirdly, the underlying assumption in the argument is that there are no other companies out there that are producing any good cameras. If it came to be known that there is another company Y that is also producing a new camera that is even more superior to what company X may be able to produce, then the TR12 will simply not be the most portable and user-friendly camera that will be released. Moreover, company X may itself be producing another camera that has all the stated qualities that is even better than TR12; or, TR12 may just be an improvement over TR11, giving minor enhancements in quality - which is not enough to establish it as the most portable and user-friendly in the market.
In essence, the argument is flawed for three reasons - lack of a benchmark to compare with, lack of statistical and historical evidence about the quality of company X's products, and lack of a fuller view of all the products being produced in the market by other such companies as company X. What could make the conclusion tenable is presenting features of TR12 vis-a-vis other old and new products in the market, a thorough analysis of company X's success rate with quality of its products, and a clear description of the meaning of 'most portable' and 'user-friendly' in addition to providing a comparison of camera prices.
