Below is the argument I have recently written. Can you provide a feedback about transitioning from one paragraph to the other, especially 3rd to 4th. Thanks much.
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a trade publication for the insurance industry:
"Each generation of Americans has lived longer that the ones preceding it, as the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in recent years. The progress of medical technology shows no sign of abating. Therefore, we can confidently predict that most children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety."
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument states that the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in the recent years and predicts that most children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The argument turns on a number of dubious assumptions. Further, it is fraught with vague and unwarrented claims.
To begin with, the argument readily assumes that the life expectancy will continue to increase because medical technology is improving day by day. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. To illustrate the point, it took several years to discover a drug to treat HIV. Many scientists are continuing to do the research to find a more effective drug. This is a definitive sign of progress of medical technology. However, whether HIV can be completely cured with the drug available is still a question. Clearly, progress of medical technology may not improve life expectancy in many cases. The argument fails to provide any evidence to prove its claim without which the argument remains unconvincing.
Further, the argument makes an implicit claim that whatever happens in the recent years is bound to happen in the next decade. This is again a weak and unsupported claim as the argument assumes that the living conditions in the next decade will remain the same as they were in the recent years. However, there may be several other factors that may impact the living conditions. For example, no one expected outbreak of H1N1 flu in the United States. Currently, United States is working towards combating the spread H1N1 flu by providing vaccines across the country. Inspite of these efforts, some may still become a victim of the flu. This condition was never present in the recent years. If it were the case, United States would have taken all measures to combat the spread of the flu. The argument needs to provide necessary details that its assumption is valid.
One would definitely want the the argument come true. The argument considers certain key points such as medical technology, which is one of the key contributing factors for advance in life expectancy. However, it is not clear whether the argument considered the above details. Without answers to these questions, the argument will be more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument that life expectancy will be greater than 90 years is presumptious. In order to assess the merits of the situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. The argument can be considerably strengthenend if the author mentioned the above factors. Without these details, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a trade publication for the insurance industry:
"Each generation of Americans has lived longer that the ones preceding it, as the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in recent years. The progress of medical technology shows no sign of abating. Therefore, we can confidently predict that most children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety."
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument states that the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in the recent years and predicts that most children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The argument turns on a number of dubious assumptions. Further, it is fraught with vague and unwarrented claims.
To begin with, the argument readily assumes that the life expectancy will continue to increase because medical technology is improving day by day. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. To illustrate the point, it took several years to discover a drug to treat HIV. Many scientists are continuing to do the research to find a more effective drug. This is a definitive sign of progress of medical technology. However, whether HIV can be completely cured with the drug available is still a question. Clearly, progress of medical technology may not improve life expectancy in many cases. The argument fails to provide any evidence to prove its claim without which the argument remains unconvincing.
Further, the argument makes an implicit claim that whatever happens in the recent years is bound to happen in the next decade. This is again a weak and unsupported claim as the argument assumes that the living conditions in the next decade will remain the same as they were in the recent years. However, there may be several other factors that may impact the living conditions. For example, no one expected outbreak of H1N1 flu in the United States. Currently, United States is working towards combating the spread H1N1 flu by providing vaccines across the country. Inspite of these efforts, some may still become a victim of the flu. This condition was never present in the recent years. If it were the case, United States would have taken all measures to combat the spread of the flu. The argument needs to provide necessary details that its assumption is valid.
One would definitely want the the argument come true. The argument considers certain key points such as medical technology, which is one of the key contributing factors for advance in life expectancy. However, it is not clear whether the argument considered the above details. Without answers to these questions, the argument will be more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument that life expectancy will be greater than 90 years is presumptious. In order to assess the merits of the situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. The argument can be considerably strengthenend if the author mentioned the above factors. Without these details, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
