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.
The writer of the article has written an article about a new product being launched by company X. The writer feels that the portability, the user friendliness, and the price of the new model TR12 are all very favourable , as far as consumer needs are concerned.
However, the writer has claimed that ,since the previous model TR11 was a universal sucess, TR12 will also be a success. This conclusion isn't backed strongly by the preceding part of the argument. The reasoning falls short on grounds of such assumptions as previous record being an indicator of future prospects of the new model and the promotions of the model being completely true regarding the performance, price and user-friendliness.
Firstly, the writer has mentioned that the promotions of the new product TR12 are about the portability, the user friendliness, and the price of the product.While this may be true of the promotions, it may not be as true about its performance. It may be so that the previous model TR11 , which was a universal success and a standard for all other models, is the most convenient model around.This can be strongly backed by the universality of the product's success and acceptence.
Secondly, the assumption that because TR11 was a universal success and a standard for all other phones, the new model TR12 will also be very successful and acceptable , is not all that logical. If one product is a success, it doesn't guarantee success for all succeeding models that would be launched. Only when the product is launched will it be revealed whether TR12 is a success or a failure.
Some people may agree that the conclusion could've been even more concrete and convincing, had the writer written this article after the launch of the product, where the response of the public ,to the product ,could've been gauged. Something about the new product, such as features which were not there in TR11 but are in TR12 , could've been mentioned to show that this new product might be universally more successful than its predecessor was. These new features would've made the argument even more solid on its point that TR12 is expected to be hit in the market, once its launched.
In conclusion, the article in the consumer-electronics magazine presents an argument which is weak in it's conclusion,being backed by equally weak premises. Assumptions and claims made on the basis of past performance aren't apt in the article, especially since these assumptions and claims are about the future, on the basis of expectations. One has to agree to the fact that articles about product launches or future product launches must include such features included in them that were absent from the new product's predecessor. Such information is much more convincing for consumers, along with being an attention magnet to the consumers.
"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.
The writer of the article has written an article about a new product being launched by company X. The writer feels that the portability, the user friendliness, and the price of the new model TR12 are all very favourable , as far as consumer needs are concerned.
However, the writer has claimed that ,since the previous model TR11 was a universal sucess, TR12 will also be a success. This conclusion isn't backed strongly by the preceding part of the argument. The reasoning falls short on grounds of such assumptions as previous record being an indicator of future prospects of the new model and the promotions of the model being completely true regarding the performance, price and user-friendliness.
Firstly, the writer has mentioned that the promotions of the new product TR12 are about the portability, the user friendliness, and the price of the product.While this may be true of the promotions, it may not be as true about its performance. It may be so that the previous model TR11 , which was a universal success and a standard for all other models, is the most convenient model around.This can be strongly backed by the universality of the product's success and acceptence.
Secondly, the assumption that because TR11 was a universal success and a standard for all other phones, the new model TR12 will also be very successful and acceptable , is not all that logical. If one product is a success, it doesn't guarantee success for all succeeding models that would be launched. Only when the product is launched will it be revealed whether TR12 is a success or a failure.
Some people may agree that the conclusion could've been even more concrete and convincing, had the writer written this article after the launch of the product, where the response of the public ,to the product ,could've been gauged. Something about the new product, such as features which were not there in TR11 but are in TR12 , could've been mentioned to show that this new product might be universally more successful than its predecessor was. These new features would've made the argument even more solid on its point that TR12 is expected to be hit in the market, once its launched.
In conclusion, the article in the consumer-electronics magazine presents an argument which is weak in it's conclusion,being backed by equally weak premises. Assumptions and claims made on the basis of past performance aren't apt in the article, especially since these assumptions and claims are about the future, on the basis of expectations. One has to agree to the fact that articles about product launches or future product launches must include such features included in them that were absent from the new product's predecessor. Such information is much more convincing for consumers, along with being an attention magnet to the consumers.
