ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was 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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument concludes that the school can raise a large amount of money for its supplemental school programs by having larger rides,expensive games and international cuisine in it's school fair.It follows that because of this they will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount they earn via commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year,thus helping them to meet their goal.Though this might be possible,the argument is full of gaps and loopholes because of fragmentary evidence.The argument fails to mention key factors,on the basis of which it can be properly evaluated.
Firstly,the argument assumes that the amount earned through a higher entrance fee and the commission, will be greater than the amount spent on upgrading the various aspects of the school fair.Such an essential piece of the argument cannot be assumed.We are presented with no figures and hence cannot assume that the upgradation of the school fair will be beneficial financially.Moreover,there is absolutely no guarantee of the number of people who will turn out for the event and thus the revenues may end up being less that the expenses.If this happens,not only will the school not earn money,they will end up running in loss.
Secondly,the argument concludes that the larger rides,international cuisine and expensive gifts will guarantee a larger crowd than last year.This conclusion is a result of hasty generalization.These added benefits may not be sufficient to draw in a larger crowd.We are not presented with the statistics as to how many people attended the school fair last year,and whether the turnout was at its maximum or not.We are also not told that who all are eligible to attend the school fair.Is the school fair only for the students,or their family or anybody can visit?All these information would help us in evaluating the argument properly.
Without convincing answers to the above questions,one is left to believe that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.The author has comfortably assumed a large amount of data.Had he taken the above mentioned factors into view,the argument would have been left irrefutable.The argument as such remains unsubstantiated and open to debate
The following appeared in a proposal for a high school's annual fundraising event:
"In order to earn the most money for supplemental school programs, we will have larger and more thrilling rides at this year's School Fair, including a ferris wheel that is twice as tall as last year's ferris wheel. In addition, the game vendors will award more expensive prizes and the food stalls will showcase a variety of upscale international dishes. As a result, we will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount we earn via our commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was 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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument concludes that the school can raise a large amount of money for its supplemental school programs by having larger rides,expensive games and international cuisine in it's school fair.It follows that because of this they will be able to charge a higher entrance fee and the dollar amount they earn via commission on the vendors' revenues will be higher than it was last year,thus helping them to meet their goal.Though this might be possible,the argument is full of gaps and loopholes because of fragmentary evidence.The argument fails to mention key factors,on the basis of which it can be properly evaluated.
Firstly,the argument assumes that the amount earned through a higher entrance fee and the commission, will be greater than the amount spent on upgrading the various aspects of the school fair.Such an essential piece of the argument cannot be assumed.We are presented with no figures and hence cannot assume that the upgradation of the school fair will be beneficial financially.Moreover,there is absolutely no guarantee of the number of people who will turn out for the event and thus the revenues may end up being less that the expenses.If this happens,not only will the school not earn money,they will end up running in loss.
Secondly,the argument concludes that the larger rides,international cuisine and expensive gifts will guarantee a larger crowd than last year.This conclusion is a result of hasty generalization.These added benefits may not be sufficient to draw in a larger crowd.We are not presented with the statistics as to how many people attended the school fair last year,and whether the turnout was at its maximum or not.We are also not told that who all are eligible to attend the school fair.Is the school fair only for the students,or their family or anybody can visit?All these information would help us in evaluating the argument properly.
Without convincing answers to the above questions,one is left to believe that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.The author has comfortably assumed a large amount of data.Had he taken the above mentioned factors into view,the argument would have been left irrefutable.The argument as such remains unsubstantiated and open to debate
