One extra thing, when I first performed spell check, about 10 spelling mistakes were identified, please bear this in mind when evaluating. Thanks again.
The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine on lifestyles.
"Two years ago, City L was listed 14th in an annual survey that ranks cities according to the quality of life that can be enjoyed by those living in them. This information will enable people who are moving to the state in which City L is located to confidently identify one place, at least, where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe, and the arts flourish."
The author argues that using a two year old survey from a magazine on lifestyles, anyone moving a to the state within city L is located to identify at least one place where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe and the arts flourish. This argument has several flaws ranging from the lack of lack of key information necessary to understand the logic of the argument to assumptions which are completely unproven.
The argument assumes people will be able to make multiple decisions based on the survey without explicitly stating what information the survey will provide. We only know it will ranks according to quality of life; however different people may interpret this very differently. Some may place significant weighting on house prices while to others safety is paramount. Without giving the breakdown of the exact information the survey will provide, it is impossible to say if the reader of the survey will be able to make such decisions. Therefore the author could significantly improve the argument by detailing what information the survey provides.
Additionally, the argument also makes the assumption that the review is an accurate portrayal of reality. There are a number of reasons why the two may differ. People may give falsely high responses so their city will appear high as this pleases them. Alternatively they may have lived in the city all their lives and have very little other experience to benchmark against, thirdly there may be some bias in the sample chosen. If it was a postal survey, perhaps only those with something positive to say bothered to respond or alternatively if it was a survey conducted on the street, the location and time meant the sample was not representative. All of these factors could potentially explain why the results of the survey may not reflect reality. The survey may have represented reality when conducted, however other factors may have changed in the past two years. The author could have strengthened the argument in relation to this particular point by explaining better the survey methodology, if the ranking is significantly based on facts and records such as recorded crimes, then it is less disputable.
The final problem with the argument is that we have no context for how good 14th in the ranking is. It only 14 cities were included in the survey then it has come last and it means the author's conclusion, someone coming to the state will know where to find good schools etc., may not be true as the city may have performed quite poorly. On the other hand it is possible that hundreds of cities were included, in which case 14th is a very good ranking, we simply cannot know based on what the author has told us in his statement.
In conclusion, by displaying the argument above in its current state with information missing and unsubstantiated assumptions, the author presents the logic of the argument very poorly. Anyone who reads this statement is very unlikely to be convinced of the legitimacy of the points mentioned and consequentially, the argument as a whole.
