Analysis of An Argument
"The recent surge in violence in the southern part of the city is a result of a shortage of police
officers and an absence of leadership on the part of the city council. In order to rectify the
burgeoning growth of crime that threatens the community, the city council must address this
issue seriously. Instead of spending time on peripheral issues such as education quality,
community vitality, and job opportunity, the city council must realize that the crime issue is
serious and double the police force, even if this action requires budget cuts from other city
programs."
----------------------------------------------------------
The argument appears to be strong at the first glance as it talks about reduction of crime. However, a further examination uncovers certain flaws as a result of which the argument lacks seriousness. Argument focuses on reduction of crime without focusing on the causes of crime. Further, it provides a baseless and sweeping conclusion to divert budget to reduction of crime at the cost of other “peripheral” elements.
Firstly, argument doesn’t focus on what factors lead to crime. There may be several factors causing violence and crime, for one, an unregulated gambling club that may be a home for cheating. Even legitimate personnel may be involved in violence if they feel they were cheated. Violence may lead to crime. Lack of education, job may also be other factors. Therefore identification of such factors is important. But the argument focuses on police as it assumes that increase in police is the only means to reduce crime.
Secondly, argument ends with a sweeping conclusion that doesn’t seem to give importance to education, job. There are many instances in which lack of education and/or job is the sole reason for crime. For one, several people were jobless as a result of the recent economic turmoil. For basic essentials such as food, clothing, may be even repayment of debts, such people may involve in theft, join mobs. This may in turn culminate into several violent activities. If the budget cuts were to happen as per the conclusion, there may be a cascading effect on crime.
In sum, although the argument is relating to reduction of crime that is very important for well-being of any community, it lacks focus. As it is rightly said that “Prevention is better than cure”, if the argument focused on prevention, it would be a convincing one.
"The recent surge in violence in the southern part of the city is a result of a shortage of police
officers and an absence of leadership on the part of the city council. In order to rectify the
burgeoning growth of crime that threatens the community, the city council must address this
issue seriously. Instead of spending time on peripheral issues such as education quality,
community vitality, and job opportunity, the city council must realize that the crime issue is
serious and double the police force, even if this action requires budget cuts from other city
programs."
----------------------------------------------------------
The argument appears to be strong at the first glance as it talks about reduction of crime. However, a further examination uncovers certain flaws as a result of which the argument lacks seriousness. Argument focuses on reduction of crime without focusing on the causes of crime. Further, it provides a baseless and sweeping conclusion to divert budget to reduction of crime at the cost of other “peripheral” elements.
Firstly, argument doesn’t focus on what factors lead to crime. There may be several factors causing violence and crime, for one, an unregulated gambling club that may be a home for cheating. Even legitimate personnel may be involved in violence if they feel they were cheated. Violence may lead to crime. Lack of education, job may also be other factors. Therefore identification of such factors is important. But the argument focuses on police as it assumes that increase in police is the only means to reduce crime.
Secondly, argument ends with a sweeping conclusion that doesn’t seem to give importance to education, job. There are many instances in which lack of education and/or job is the sole reason for crime. For one, several people were jobless as a result of the recent economic turmoil. For basic essentials such as food, clothing, may be even repayment of debts, such people may involve in theft, join mobs. This may in turn culminate into several violent activities. If the budget cuts were to happen as per the conclusion, there may be a cascading effect on crime.
In sum, although the argument is relating to reduction of crime that is very important for well-being of any community, it lacks focus. As it is rightly said that “Prevention is better than cure”, if the argument focused on prevention, it would be a convincing one.
