Hey guys,
Would appreciate any feedback regarding my AWA: Analysis of an argument. Thanks.
********************************************
The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president:
"The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
********************************************
Response:
The aforementioned argument, in asserting that by the indulging in socially responsible activities Easy Credit can convince customers to opt for its credit card services over that of its competitors, appears, at first glance, to be coherent and fairly convincing. However, upon closer examination, a number of flaws become evident to such an extent that neither the argument nor the conclusion can be taken seriously. Among the most pivotal of the argument's shortcomings are its inability to recognize, or even acknowledge, its assumptions, as well as the negligence of necessary information required to substantiate its claims.
The primary pitfall of the argument lies in the several unproven assumptions that it makes. The argument assumes that, an environmental organization would be willing to associate with the company for an undisclosed donation that Easy Credit is willing to make, while this organization might have already entered into an exclusive arrangement with one of the Easy Credit's competitors.
Additionally, the argument assumes that, the sample used for the recent poll cited in the passage is representative of the population, at large. In truth, it may be possible that, the sample surveyed represents a small fraction of the population that is environmentally aware, as opposed to a majority of the population who would be indifferent to the environmental initiative proposed by Easy Credit Company. The lack of any genuine evidentiary support renders the argument invalid.
Although the argument relies on questionable premises and assumption, it would be presumptuous to say that the argument as a whole is without base. If the author truly wishes to convince the reader of the argument's conclusion, he will have to take steps to remedy the fallacies cited in the above paragraphs to strengthen the argument. Possibly, by providing empirical evidence that the sample surveyed is representative of the general population, at large. Additionally, by providing examples of environmental agencies willing to associate with Easy Credit Company.
In conclusion, the argument in its present form is poorly articulated and unacceptable. The author will find it difficult to convince his readers regarding the validity of the argument, unless, he takes measures to overcome the fallacies of the argument.
********************************************
Thanks. Wish me luck
Would appreciate any feedback regarding my AWA: Analysis of an argument. Thanks.
********************************************
The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president:
"The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
********************************************
Response:
The aforementioned argument, in asserting that by the indulging in socially responsible activities Easy Credit can convince customers to opt for its credit card services over that of its competitors, appears, at first glance, to be coherent and fairly convincing. However, upon closer examination, a number of flaws become evident to such an extent that neither the argument nor the conclusion can be taken seriously. Among the most pivotal of the argument's shortcomings are its inability to recognize, or even acknowledge, its assumptions, as well as the negligence of necessary information required to substantiate its claims.
The primary pitfall of the argument lies in the several unproven assumptions that it makes. The argument assumes that, an environmental organization would be willing to associate with the company for an undisclosed donation that Easy Credit is willing to make, while this organization might have already entered into an exclusive arrangement with one of the Easy Credit's competitors.
Additionally, the argument assumes that, the sample used for the recent poll cited in the passage is representative of the population, at large. In truth, it may be possible that, the sample surveyed represents a small fraction of the population that is environmentally aware, as opposed to a majority of the population who would be indifferent to the environmental initiative proposed by Easy Credit Company. The lack of any genuine evidentiary support renders the argument invalid.
Although the argument relies on questionable premises and assumption, it would be presumptuous to say that the argument as a whole is without base. If the author truly wishes to convince the reader of the argument's conclusion, he will have to take steps to remedy the fallacies cited in the above paragraphs to strengthen the argument. Possibly, by providing empirical evidence that the sample surveyed is representative of the general population, at large. Additionally, by providing examples of environmental agencies willing to associate with Easy Credit Company.
In conclusion, the argument in its present form is poorly articulated and unacceptable. The author will find it difficult to convince his readers regarding the validity of the argument, unless, he takes measures to overcome the fallacies of the argument.
********************************************
Thanks. Wish me luck
