-
Abhijit K
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:52 am
- Followed by:4 members
The following appeared as part of an article reviewing summer camps for children.
Parents, if you need a summer camp for your children look no further than Federville Farms. In a recent survey, Federville Farms ranked first in both overall camper satisfaction and in food quality, and second in the variety of outdoor activities. Federville Farms has been family owned and operated for over forty years, so you have nothing to worry about when it comes to your child's safety, and it employs more Red Cross certified lifeguards than any other camp in the state. If you seek the best camp experience for your children, Federville Farms is the best choice you can make.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
In the given argument the author contends that Federville Farms is the best summer camp for children as it serves good food quality, provides good safety and is ranked first as far as camper satisfaction is concerned. However, the authors' argument is flawed as he does not provide reliable assurance to support his claims and makes unjustified assumptions.
The first assumption made by the author is that because Federville Farms is ranked first in both camper satisfaction and in food quality it is the best summer camp for children. However there may be a case where Federville has an adult customer base and hence gets its first ranking. The author needs to validate whether it ranks first among children in case of camper satisfaction and food quality.
The second assumption made by the author here is that he assumes that a history of forty years assumes good safety for children. Just being in the market for forty years does not provide any guarantee for the safety of children. The author needs to validate this claim by providing statistics regarding safety of campers during camping. For example, if Federville has a very low, say 1 in 100 injuries among campers, then we can say that Federville is assures safety of campers.
The third assumption made by the author is that because Federville employs the largest number of Red Cross Certified Lifeguards it is the best for the safety of children. However, there may be case where Federville needs to employ a large number of Red Cross Certified Lifeguards because there are too many injuries to the campers at Federville which requires attention from the Red Cross Lifeguards. This would rather signify a lack of safety at Federville.
Authors' argument is flawed as he does not provide proper justifications for claims made by him about safety, food quality and number one in customer satisfaction at Federville for children. The author should provide some statistics for customer satisfaction among children and safety of campers to prove his argument. Hence, I conclude that the authors argument is flawed on account of faulty reasoning and unjustified assumptions.
Parents, if you need a summer camp for your children look no further than Federville Farms. In a recent survey, Federville Farms ranked first in both overall camper satisfaction and in food quality, and second in the variety of outdoor activities. Federville Farms has been family owned and operated for over forty years, so you have nothing to worry about when it comes to your child's safety, and it employs more Red Cross certified lifeguards than any other camp in the state. If you seek the best camp experience for your children, Federville Farms is the best choice you can make.
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
In the given argument the author contends that Federville Farms is the best summer camp for children as it serves good food quality, provides good safety and is ranked first as far as camper satisfaction is concerned. However, the authors' argument is flawed as he does not provide reliable assurance to support his claims and makes unjustified assumptions.
The first assumption made by the author is that because Federville Farms is ranked first in both camper satisfaction and in food quality it is the best summer camp for children. However there may be a case where Federville has an adult customer base and hence gets its first ranking. The author needs to validate whether it ranks first among children in case of camper satisfaction and food quality.
The second assumption made by the author here is that he assumes that a history of forty years assumes good safety for children. Just being in the market for forty years does not provide any guarantee for the safety of children. The author needs to validate this claim by providing statistics regarding safety of campers during camping. For example, if Federville has a very low, say 1 in 100 injuries among campers, then we can say that Federville is assures safety of campers.
The third assumption made by the author is that because Federville employs the largest number of Red Cross Certified Lifeguards it is the best for the safety of children. However, there may be case where Federville needs to employ a large number of Red Cross Certified Lifeguards because there are too many injuries to the campers at Federville which requires attention from the Red Cross Lifeguards. This would rather signify a lack of safety at Federville.
Authors' argument is flawed as he does not provide proper justifications for claims made by him about safety, food quality and number one in customer satisfaction at Federville for children. The author should provide some statistics for customer satisfaction among children and safety of campers to prove his argument. Hence, I conclude that the authors argument is flawed on account of faulty reasoning and unjustified assumptions.
