The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"žIn 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 hight butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaries."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. ...
The author of the passage argues, that people nowadays are not as concerned about their consumption of certain products, such as red meat and fatty cheeses, than 10 years ago, and supports that argument by giving three different shops and restaurants as example. Although looking at the three shops and restaurants mentioned may give some indication of the people's preferences, the argument is not sound due to insufficient information given.
First, the author takes three different shops close together and compares the product range of now with the one of 10 years ago. Since some products, like red meat and fatty cheeses are now sold in the shops, which were not there before, he concludes that people are generally less concerned with the intake of such products. The most serious flaw in the article is that there is not sufficient evidence to conclude such a general statement from a very small sample of shops and people. It may be that some people are now less concerned about the consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses, who usually buy in the mentioned shops, however there is no indication that this group of people is representative to conclude such a broad statement.
Furthermore, there is no reference whatsoever about the consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses. Although people now seem to purchase these products in the mentioned shops, there is no indication that they consume more. Before those shops have taken these products into their product range, people could have bought them somewhere else, for example in dairy and butcher shops. Nowadays most products can be bought from a single supermarket, which before had to be purchases from many different smaller shops. Therefore we cannot conclude about the consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses from the given information.
Lastly, it is not mentioned by the author in what kind of area these shops are and what people purchase in thoses shops. If these shops opened in an area where the people where rather poor, they would not have been in a position to spend their money on luxury products such as red meat and fatty cheeses. The increase in sales volume of the shops could be a result of an economic development of the area. That is, people may have more money to spend on such luxury products, and therefore sales volume have gone up. The reason for an increased consumption in this case would be higher incomes instead of less health concerns.
To conclude, the author infers from a very small sample a very general conclusion. For to make such conclusion, a larger sample would be required with additional information. Also there is no mention made whether consumption has actually increased. Since it may be that people bought their red meat and fatty cheeses in different shops before, we cannot conclude that consumption has risen. Lastly, an economic development of the area of the mentioned shops could have caused higher consumption, leaving the argument that the higher consumption is caused by lesser health concerns with no ground.
Although there is an indication about the behaviour of the people purchasing red meat and fatty cheeses in the mentioned shops, we can by no means conclude that generally this is caused by lesser health concerns of the people.
"žIn 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 hight butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaries."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. ...
The author of the passage argues, that people nowadays are not as concerned about their consumption of certain products, such as red meat and fatty cheeses, than 10 years ago, and supports that argument by giving three different shops and restaurants as example. Although looking at the three shops and restaurants mentioned may give some indication of the people's preferences, the argument is not sound due to insufficient information given.
First, the author takes three different shops close together and compares the product range of now with the one of 10 years ago. Since some products, like red meat and fatty cheeses are now sold in the shops, which were not there before, he concludes that people are generally less concerned with the intake of such products. The most serious flaw in the article is that there is not sufficient evidence to conclude such a general statement from a very small sample of shops and people. It may be that some people are now less concerned about the consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses, who usually buy in the mentioned shops, however there is no indication that this group of people is representative to conclude such a broad statement.
Furthermore, there is no reference whatsoever about the consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses. Although people now seem to purchase these products in the mentioned shops, there is no indication that they consume more. Before those shops have taken these products into their product range, people could have bought them somewhere else, for example in dairy and butcher shops. Nowadays most products can be bought from a single supermarket, which before had to be purchases from many different smaller shops. Therefore we cannot conclude about the consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses from the given information.
Lastly, it is not mentioned by the author in what kind of area these shops are and what people purchase in thoses shops. If these shops opened in an area where the people where rather poor, they would not have been in a position to spend their money on luxury products such as red meat and fatty cheeses. The increase in sales volume of the shops could be a result of an economic development of the area. That is, people may have more money to spend on such luxury products, and therefore sales volume have gone up. The reason for an increased consumption in this case would be higher incomes instead of less health concerns.
To conclude, the author infers from a very small sample a very general conclusion. For to make such conclusion, a larger sample would be required with additional information. Also there is no mention made whether consumption has actually increased. Since it may be that people bought their red meat and fatty cheeses in different shops before, we cannot conclude that consumption has risen. Lastly, an economic development of the area of the mentioned shops could have caused higher consumption, leaving the argument that the higher consumption is caused by lesser health concerns with no ground.
Although there is an indication about the behaviour of the people purchasing red meat and fatty cheeses in the mentioned shops, we can by no means conclude that generally this is caused by lesser health concerns of the people.
