Please review my essay - I appreciate your help!
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"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."
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.
My Response:
While the magazine article presents an interesting viewpoint that people are not as concerned about eating red meats and fatty cheeses as they once were, the argument is not completely justified. The article makes a general argument that is supported by limited reasoning based off of two proof points. The argument can be strengthened by, first, strengthening the way that each of these proof points ties back into the viewpoint and then, providing more evidence beyond the performance of a couple stores and restaurants in a neighborhood.
The article mentions that the Heart's Delight store has a wide selection of fatty cheeses. However, this store also sells other produce such as fruits, vegetables, and whole-grain products. It is unclear from this article how well the cheeses at the store sells compared to the store's other products. It is possible that very few people who shop at this store actually buy cheese. This point in the argument can be strengthened by indicating that the cheeses at this store have been selling better than the other "healthier" options over the past decade.
The second point the argument makes is that Good Earth Cafe is not performing as well as a business than House of Beef. While this may be an indicator that people prefer eating at a meat heavy restaurant than a vegetarian restaurant, there might be other factors influencing customers' decision on which restaurant to go to. Perhaps House of Beef has a better atmosphere, better service, or better advertising than Good Earth Cafe. In order for this point to support the argument that people are choosing to consume more red meat, we must first ensure that Good Earth Cafe and House of Beef are comparable on the other dimensions that would affect a customer's restaurant choice.
Finally, the article should provide more evidence of the overall performance of the red meat and fatty cheese industry before coming to the conclusion that people have grown to be less concerned with regulating their intake of these options. The argument can be improved by providing evidence that the growth in sales of both of these industries over the past decade has significantly increased while growth of other food sales has remained constant. The article can also strengthen its assertion by surveying people's opinions on whether or not they are concerned about their red meat and fatty cheese intake over time.
The magazine article provides two proof points to support its argument that people are not as concerned about their red meat and fatty cheese intake as in the past. Each of these points can be strengthened by better tying them to the assertion. The article should also provide evidence beyond what is found in a single neighborhood of stores and restaurants before making a generalization about the attitudes and views of the population.[/u]
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"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."
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.
My Response:
While the magazine article presents an interesting viewpoint that people are not as concerned about eating red meats and fatty cheeses as they once were, the argument is not completely justified. The article makes a general argument that is supported by limited reasoning based off of two proof points. The argument can be strengthened by, first, strengthening the way that each of these proof points ties back into the viewpoint and then, providing more evidence beyond the performance of a couple stores and restaurants in a neighborhood.
The article mentions that the Heart's Delight store has a wide selection of fatty cheeses. However, this store also sells other produce such as fruits, vegetables, and whole-grain products. It is unclear from this article how well the cheeses at the store sells compared to the store's other products. It is possible that very few people who shop at this store actually buy cheese. This point in the argument can be strengthened by indicating that the cheeses at this store have been selling better than the other "healthier" options over the past decade.
The second point the argument makes is that Good Earth Cafe is not performing as well as a business than House of Beef. While this may be an indicator that people prefer eating at a meat heavy restaurant than a vegetarian restaurant, there might be other factors influencing customers' decision on which restaurant to go to. Perhaps House of Beef has a better atmosphere, better service, or better advertising than Good Earth Cafe. In order for this point to support the argument that people are choosing to consume more red meat, we must first ensure that Good Earth Cafe and House of Beef are comparable on the other dimensions that would affect a customer's restaurant choice.
Finally, the article should provide more evidence of the overall performance of the red meat and fatty cheese industry before coming to the conclusion that people have grown to be less concerned with regulating their intake of these options. The argument can be improved by providing evidence that the growth in sales of both of these industries over the past decade has significantly increased while growth of other food sales has remained constant. The article can also strengthen its assertion by surveying people's opinions on whether or not they are concerned about their red meat and fatty cheese intake over time.
The magazine article provides two proof points to support its argument that people are not as concerned about their red meat and fatty cheese intake as in the past. Each of these points can be strengthened by better tying them to the assertion. The article should also provide evidence beyond what is found in a single neighborhood of stores and restaurants before making a generalization about the attitudes and views of the population.[/u]
