ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a newspaper editorial:
"The claims of some politicians that we are on the brink of an energy crisis are misguided. We have enough oil in reserve to see us through any production shortage and the supply of in-ground oil is in no danger of running out any time soon. There is thus no need to set aside the technology and infrastructure of a century of oil-based energy."
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.
MY RESPONSE:
The usage and availability of energy resources has become a topic of debate throughout the world. In this argument the author states that the claims of politicians on the energy crisis are misguided and feels we have enough oil to see us through any shortage. The author's argument is based on an unsubstantiated premise and weak assumptions.
Firstly, the author's sole focus is on the factors that affect the availability of oil, he fails to take into account factors that affect other sources of energy. The politicians in question could be speaking on shortage in other sources of energy apart from oil. Further more, the author extends his argument stating that we have enough reserves for any production shortage. The author does not state explicitly the number of years the reserves would last and does not have any factual statements or survey results to back his statement on the availability of reserves.
Secondly, the author only mentions in-ground oil supply to back his statement on oil reserves, and does not back his argument with proof of any scientific finding or independent research. The author takes a stand that cannot be justified by stating that we don't have to invest money and time in developing new and efficient technologies for oil extraction. The author feels that current technology expertise is sufficient to cater to the needs of the future. In making this assumption, the author fails to take into account, the fact that technology has to constantly change and organizations have to continuously innovate to adapt to changing times.
Though the argument is illogical and not backed by factual statements or results, it will not be right to dismiss it right away as lacking any base. The author could make his argument more convincing by backing his statements with results of recent surveys or research findings that are relevant to the topic in hand.
In sum, the argument lacks any substantial premise and is based on unwarranted assumptions. The author seems to have put no effort in backing his arguments with proper proofs such as results of research findings, data collected by independent and established organizations and facts on increase in the use of oil year on year. The author also fails to take into account other factors that could impact the reserves and supply of current levels of oil.
The following appeared in a newspaper editorial:
"The claims of some politicians that we are on the brink of an energy crisis are misguided. We have enough oil in reserve to see us through any production shortage and the supply of in-ground oil is in no danger of running out any time soon. There is thus no need to set aside the technology and infrastructure of a century of oil-based energy."
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.
MY RESPONSE:
The usage and availability of energy resources has become a topic of debate throughout the world. In this argument the author states that the claims of politicians on the energy crisis are misguided and feels we have enough oil to see us through any shortage. The author's argument is based on an unsubstantiated premise and weak assumptions.
Firstly, the author's sole focus is on the factors that affect the availability of oil, he fails to take into account factors that affect other sources of energy. The politicians in question could be speaking on shortage in other sources of energy apart from oil. Further more, the author extends his argument stating that we have enough reserves for any production shortage. The author does not state explicitly the number of years the reserves would last and does not have any factual statements or survey results to back his statement on the availability of reserves.
Secondly, the author only mentions in-ground oil supply to back his statement on oil reserves, and does not back his argument with proof of any scientific finding or independent research. The author takes a stand that cannot be justified by stating that we don't have to invest money and time in developing new and efficient technologies for oil extraction. The author feels that current technology expertise is sufficient to cater to the needs of the future. In making this assumption, the author fails to take into account, the fact that technology has to constantly change and organizations have to continuously innovate to adapt to changing times.
Though the argument is illogical and not backed by factual statements or results, it will not be right to dismiss it right away as lacking any base. The author could make his argument more convincing by backing his statements with results of recent surveys or research findings that are relevant to the topic in hand.
In sum, the argument lacks any substantial premise and is based on unwarranted assumptions. The author seems to have put no effort in backing his arguments with proper proofs such as results of research findings, data collected by independent and established organizations and facts on increase in the use of oil year on year. The author also fails to take into account other factors that could impact the reserves and supply of current levels of oil.
