Essay:
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts. "In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public
television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television." Discuss how well reasoned . . . Etc.
Your Response:
The argument claims that the attendance at the city's art museum is expected to decrease because of the following two assumptions: 1) Number of people visiting the museum has increased by a similar percentage as the number of people watching TV programs about the visual arts in the last five years. 2) The public television is facing the problem of severe corporate funding cuts. Hence, the author concludes that some of the city's funds allocated for supporting arts should be reallocated to public television. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions which are not strong enough to prove the author's viewpoint. While this argument is somewhat convincing, it is not sound because its line of reasoning is not compelling.
First of all, the argument readily assumes that increased exposure to public television visual art programs has caused the similar increase in the attendance at the city's museum in the last five years. However, the polls conducted may establish statistically that increase in percentage of the people attending the museum is equal to the percentage of people viewing the television's visual art programs, they do not necessarily means that the increase in the cause of the viewer ship of the arts programs on TV is the cause of the increase in the attendance at the city's museum .Hence, the author fails to demonstrate the co-relation between the percentage increase in the viewer ship of the TV's visual art programs and that of the attendance at the city's art museum. The argument would have been much clearer if the author had explicitly established the co-relation by giving strong evidences.
Secondly, the author states that since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, the attendance at the city's art museums is also expected to decrease. Thus, some of the funds supporting the arts should be allocated to the public television. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. The author has based the conclusion on an unsubstantial assumption. Here also, author fails to establish the co-relation discussed in the preceding paragraph. The author did not consider that the other important social or cultural factors may cause greater public interest in public art's museum. If the author had been able to establish the argument by excluding the factors mentioned while drawing the conclusion, he would have sounded more convincing.
Thirdly, the conclusion is based on the results of the poll conducted five years back compared with those of the recent poll. However, the argument does not address the effectiveness of the poll conducted 5 years back. The argument would be weakened because of a biased survey and improper responses of the people. Since, five years is a very long period, the statistics of the poll conducted can no longer be used as the future prediction. If the author had not overlooked the above factors, the argument would not have been weakened.
In conclusion, the argument is weak and not convincing enough. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly had considered all the relevant factors mentioned in the preceding paragraphs. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city's council on the arts. "In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city's art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public
television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city's art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city's funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television." Discuss how well reasoned . . . Etc.
Your Response:
The argument claims that the attendance at the city's art museum is expected to decrease because of the following two assumptions: 1) Number of people visiting the museum has increased by a similar percentage as the number of people watching TV programs about the visual arts in the last five years. 2) The public television is facing the problem of severe corporate funding cuts. Hence, the author concludes that some of the city's funds allocated for supporting arts should be reallocated to public television. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions which are not strong enough to prove the author's viewpoint. While this argument is somewhat convincing, it is not sound because its line of reasoning is not compelling.
First of all, the argument readily assumes that increased exposure to public television visual art programs has caused the similar increase in the attendance at the city's museum in the last five years. However, the polls conducted may establish statistically that increase in percentage of the people attending the museum is equal to the percentage of people viewing the television's visual art programs, they do not necessarily means that the increase in the cause of the viewer ship of the arts programs on TV is the cause of the increase in the attendance at the city's museum .Hence, the author fails to demonstrate the co-relation between the percentage increase in the viewer ship of the TV's visual art programs and that of the attendance at the city's art museum. The argument would have been much clearer if the author had explicitly established the co-relation by giving strong evidences.
Secondly, the author states that since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, the attendance at the city's art museums is also expected to decrease. Thus, some of the funds supporting the arts should be allocated to the public television. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. The author has based the conclusion on an unsubstantial assumption. Here also, author fails to establish the co-relation discussed in the preceding paragraph. The author did not consider that the other important social or cultural factors may cause greater public interest in public art's museum. If the author had been able to establish the argument by excluding the factors mentioned while drawing the conclusion, he would have sounded more convincing.
Thirdly, the conclusion is based on the results of the poll conducted five years back compared with those of the recent poll. However, the argument does not address the effectiveness of the poll conducted 5 years back. The argument would be weakened because of a biased survey and improper responses of the people. Since, five years is a very long period, the statistics of the poll conducted can no longer be used as the future prediction. If the author had not overlooked the above factors, the argument would not have been weakened.
In conclusion, the argument is weak and not convincing enough. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly had considered all the relevant factors mentioned in the preceding paragraphs. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.
