The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
"This past winter, 200 students from Waymarsh State College traveled to the state capitol building to protest against proposed cuts in funding for various state college programs. The other 12,000 Waymarsh students evidently weren't so concerned about their education: they either stayed on campus or left for winter break. Since the group who did not protest is far more numerous, it is more representative of the state's college students than are the protesters.
Therefore the state legislature need not heed the appeals of the protesting students."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
According to a local news paper editorial, 200 students from Waymarsh State College travelled to the state capitol building to protest against proposed cuts in the funding for various state college programs, this last summer. The number of students who protested was outnumbered by the number of students who stayed in college or went on holidays. As the number of students not participating in protest was far more numerous than students participating, the author thinks that the non participating students represent the State College. So he claims that the State legislature need not respond to the protesting students. Though the claim seems to have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable assumptions and solely based on the evidence he provides, we cannot accept the argument to be valid. The author needs to back up his argument with legitimate evidence and explicate his assumptions which he lacks in this argument.
First, the author states that the population of students participating in protest is very small compared to the students not participating in the protest. Therefore he assumes that the protesting population does not represent the voice of State College. Here the author fails to consider that this population of students participating in protest might be the representative students. Each student could represent a group of students who could not participate. The students participating in the protest might be representing a cub, house, society in the college. In this situation even the small number of protesting students could representing the entire college population. The author fails to consider this factor in his argument. Here the author can make his argument strong if he can clarify that the students participating do not represent any group of students from college and they speak only on behalf of themselves.
Second, the author states that 1200 students either stayed back in college or left for winter break, so this population of students are clearly not concerned about their education. The author assumes that to support a protest one has to be physically present in the protest. Nowadays due to the technological advancement it has become possible to support a cause even without being physically present in the protest. The author fails to consider that students staying back in college might be using college media or internet to protest against the state legislature. The power of social media and internet was clearly seen during Arab uprising, as the use of social media and internet had significant impact on the dethroning of the dictators. Even though the people were not able to protest physically, their protest through social media played an important role to put a pressure on the government. Now a days use of facebook and youtube has become quite common platform to protest against something. In addition to that, some students who left for winter break might be using the time to get outside support or might be using the time to make more people aware on the situation. If the students are working for the cause even without being present in the protest we cannot conclude that these students are not concerned about the cause. Here if the author intends to make his argument strong he should provide evidence stating that the students who have gone to the State Capitol building are the only students interested in the cause and the non participating students are not at all interested in the matter or are indifferent to whatever decision the State Legislature takes.
In sum, the author's illogical argument in based on unsupportive assumptions and lacks legitimate evidentiary support which renders the conclusion invalid. If the author truly wants to convince the reader, he needs to restructure his argument, fix flaws in his logic, explicate his assumptions and provide supportive evidences. In failing to do so, the author is likely to convince very few people.
"This past winter, 200 students from Waymarsh State College traveled to the state capitol building to protest against proposed cuts in funding for various state college programs. The other 12,000 Waymarsh students evidently weren't so concerned about their education: they either stayed on campus or left for winter break. Since the group who did not protest is far more numerous, it is more representative of the state's college students than are the protesters.
Therefore the state legislature need not heed the appeals of the protesting students."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
According to a local news paper editorial, 200 students from Waymarsh State College travelled to the state capitol building to protest against proposed cuts in the funding for various state college programs, this last summer. The number of students who protested was outnumbered by the number of students who stayed in college or went on holidays. As the number of students not participating in protest was far more numerous than students participating, the author thinks that the non participating students represent the State College. So he claims that the State legislature need not respond to the protesting students. Though the claim seems to have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable assumptions and solely based on the evidence he provides, we cannot accept the argument to be valid. The author needs to back up his argument with legitimate evidence and explicate his assumptions which he lacks in this argument.
First, the author states that the population of students participating in protest is very small compared to the students not participating in the protest. Therefore he assumes that the protesting population does not represent the voice of State College. Here the author fails to consider that this population of students participating in protest might be the representative students. Each student could represent a group of students who could not participate. The students participating in the protest might be representing a cub, house, society in the college. In this situation even the small number of protesting students could representing the entire college population. The author fails to consider this factor in his argument. Here the author can make his argument strong if he can clarify that the students participating do not represent any group of students from college and they speak only on behalf of themselves.
Second, the author states that 1200 students either stayed back in college or left for winter break, so this population of students are clearly not concerned about their education. The author assumes that to support a protest one has to be physically present in the protest. Nowadays due to the technological advancement it has become possible to support a cause even without being physically present in the protest. The author fails to consider that students staying back in college might be using college media or internet to protest against the state legislature. The power of social media and internet was clearly seen during Arab uprising, as the use of social media and internet had significant impact on the dethroning of the dictators. Even though the people were not able to protest physically, their protest through social media played an important role to put a pressure on the government. Now a days use of facebook and youtube has become quite common platform to protest against something. In addition to that, some students who left for winter break might be using the time to get outside support or might be using the time to make more people aware on the situation. If the students are working for the cause even without being present in the protest we cannot conclude that these students are not concerned about the cause. Here if the author intends to make his argument strong he should provide evidence stating that the students who have gone to the State Capitol building are the only students interested in the cause and the non participating students are not at all interested in the matter or are indifferent to whatever decision the State Legislature takes.
In sum, the author's illogical argument in based on unsupportive assumptions and lacks legitimate evidentiary support which renders the conclusion invalid. If the author truly wants to convince the reader, he needs to restructure his argument, fix flaws in his logic, explicate his assumptions and provide supportive evidences. In failing to do so, the author is likely to convince very few people.
