“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color
film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in
1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can
expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your 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 conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument,
what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
Author concludes that Olympics food will minimize its operating costs and maximize its profit. Reason behind the conclusion is that Olympic food has 25 years long experience, and author assumes that long term experience enables an organization in minimizing its operation costs and increasing profits. There are many pieces of evidence that there are so many assumptions which connect evidences to conclusion. Moreover, so many of these assumptions arguable that argument does not seem persuasive.
First, Author cites film processing as evidence. Without citing any proper reason, he assumes that reduction in cost of film processing is caused by its long term experience in its field. There may be many other reasons, responsible for the cost reduction such as technology improvement, reduction in labor cost, reduction in the cost of raw materials etc.
Second, Author assumes an analogy between film processing and food processing.
Without any evidence author assumes that long experience will increase the profits and reduce the operating costs in food processing as it does in film processing. Factors responsible for costs reduction food processing may differ from those responsible got the costs reduction in film processing. Without any sound evidence, analogy does not seem plausible.
In addition, author assumes that efficiency is directly related to experience. Only having long experience does not certify anyone to do certain task. Other factors, such as management skill, understanding of current market scenarios etc, are also responsible for efficiency.
There are many loopholes in the argument so argument does not seem persuasive. If author provided evidences, cited above, argument would be more persuasive.
Without these, argument is weak and fails to impress reader.
film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in
1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can
expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your 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 conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument,
what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
Author concludes that Olympics food will minimize its operating costs and maximize its profit. Reason behind the conclusion is that Olympic food has 25 years long experience, and author assumes that long term experience enables an organization in minimizing its operation costs and increasing profits. There are many pieces of evidence that there are so many assumptions which connect evidences to conclusion. Moreover, so many of these assumptions arguable that argument does not seem persuasive.
First, Author cites film processing as evidence. Without citing any proper reason, he assumes that reduction in cost of film processing is caused by its long term experience in its field. There may be many other reasons, responsible for the cost reduction such as technology improvement, reduction in labor cost, reduction in the cost of raw materials etc.
Second, Author assumes an analogy between film processing and food processing.
Without any evidence author assumes that long experience will increase the profits and reduce the operating costs in food processing as it does in film processing. Factors responsible for costs reduction food processing may differ from those responsible got the costs reduction in film processing. Without any sound evidence, analogy does not seem plausible.
In addition, author assumes that efficiency is directly related to experience. Only having long experience does not certify anyone to do certain task. Other factors, such as management skill, understanding of current market scenarios etc, are also responsible for efficiency.
There are many loopholes in the argument so argument does not seem persuasive. If author provided evidences, cited above, argument would be more persuasive.
Without these, argument is weak and fails to impress reader.
