Argument:
In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires.
Response:
The author does not provide enough evidence to support the generalization that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. In support of the conclusion, the author states that, the Heart's Delight store has a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content which is insufficient. Furthermore, the author states that the Good Earth Cafe owners make a modest living, but the owners the new House of Beef are millionaires, which is insufficient as well.
Just because the Heart's Delight has a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content, does not mean that people will purchase these products. Moreover, the store could also have a wide selection of other products including cheeses made with low butterfat content. Therefore, this piece of evidence is insufficient to support the conclusion.
In stating that the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegitarian restaurant are still making a modest living, but the new House of Beef owners are millionaires, the author seems to imply that this is because people buy more beef than vegetables. However, the author fails to provide evidence to support this claim. The House of Beef could also be selling other products apart from beef. It could also be the case that the owners of the House of Beef own other businesses, which might explain their wealth.
This authors conclusion would have been stronger if more information on the claims made was offered. For example, if the sales figures for the cheese made with high butterfat content was greater than those of the cheese made with low butterfat content, it would better support the conclusion.
In conclusion, the authors argument is weak because it fails to provide sufficient information to back claims made.
In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires.
Response:
The author does not provide enough evidence to support the generalization that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. In support of the conclusion, the author states that, the Heart's Delight store has a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content which is insufficient. Furthermore, the author states that the Good Earth Cafe owners make a modest living, but the owners the new House of Beef are millionaires, which is insufficient as well.
Just because the Heart's Delight has a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content, does not mean that people will purchase these products. Moreover, the store could also have a wide selection of other products including cheeses made with low butterfat content. Therefore, this piece of evidence is insufficient to support the conclusion.
In stating that the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegitarian restaurant are still making a modest living, but the new House of Beef owners are millionaires, the author seems to imply that this is because people buy more beef than vegetables. However, the author fails to provide evidence to support this claim. The House of Beef could also be selling other products apart from beef. It could also be the case that the owners of the House of Beef own other businesses, which might explain their wealth.
This authors conclusion would have been stronger if more information on the claims made was offered. For example, if the sales figures for the cheese made with high butterfat content was greater than those of the cheese made with low butterfat content, it would better support the conclusion.
In conclusion, the authors argument is weak because it fails to provide sufficient information to back claims made.
