""As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana, which is bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement efforts have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine."
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.
=========================================================
The author has brought into light one of the grave issues which has to be seen and thought deeply. For decades drugs have slowly corroded the social values and more and more youth have fallen victim to its menace. As a result, federal narcotics department are on the prowl to catch these drug trafickers. According to author, drug trafickers have started circulating more cocaine in the market over marijuana and heroine owing increased vigilance and blames them for its increase. I would strictly counter his argument for the lack of investigation and depth of reasoning.
Firstly, no drug is excluded from the list of narcotics department as a legal product, and use of one drug over other does not evade the scrutiny of the officers. A drug dealer trafficking cocaine over marijuana or LSD does not put him in a comfortable position. Further, prevention of import of drugs in nation does not necessarily mean cocaine can be locally produced. Thanks to CIA and local intelligence, except for Nepal, Spain and few African countries exporting cocaine, it is impossible to produce and store cocaine in any country. Hence , the author has illogically blamed the authorities for the observed cause.
Secondly, pointing at the heroin´s case specifically, the author claims its market to be too small in comparison to other drugs. Even if we exempt drug from its effects, this argument is absolutely illogical on the part of the author as smaller market should mean greater potential and safer business. In such a situation, it should be more attractive over cocaine which has a larger market and naturally encompasses more chances of being busted. Hence author has not carefully corellated his conclusion with the situation.
Thirdly, even if we consider author´s finding being true, one should wonder why cocaine circulation has increased anyway ? Cocaine being easy to traffic due to its resemblance with sugar and due to some corrupt officials could be possible reasons for its increased use. However, deeds of few corrupt officials and lack of vigilance techniques are certainly not in agreement with the enforcement efforts. Hence once again, it is improper to buttress the argument with enforcement efforts.
In sum, the author has wrongly brought in a causal relationship between growth of cocaine circulation and increased vigilance. Statistical inadequacy apart, this reasoning is completely fallacious and far from even being seen as an irony. Drug abuse is a grave concern, but appropriately searching the root cause would be beneficial for the community.
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.
=========================================================
The author has brought into light one of the grave issues which has to be seen and thought deeply. For decades drugs have slowly corroded the social values and more and more youth have fallen victim to its menace. As a result, federal narcotics department are on the prowl to catch these drug trafickers. According to author, drug trafickers have started circulating more cocaine in the market over marijuana and heroine owing increased vigilance and blames them for its increase. I would strictly counter his argument for the lack of investigation and depth of reasoning.
Firstly, no drug is excluded from the list of narcotics department as a legal product, and use of one drug over other does not evade the scrutiny of the officers. A drug dealer trafficking cocaine over marijuana or LSD does not put him in a comfortable position. Further, prevention of import of drugs in nation does not necessarily mean cocaine can be locally produced. Thanks to CIA and local intelligence, except for Nepal, Spain and few African countries exporting cocaine, it is impossible to produce and store cocaine in any country. Hence , the author has illogically blamed the authorities for the observed cause.
Secondly, pointing at the heroin´s case specifically, the author claims its market to be too small in comparison to other drugs. Even if we exempt drug from its effects, this argument is absolutely illogical on the part of the author as smaller market should mean greater potential and safer business. In such a situation, it should be more attractive over cocaine which has a larger market and naturally encompasses more chances of being busted. Hence author has not carefully corellated his conclusion with the situation.
Thirdly, even if we consider author´s finding being true, one should wonder why cocaine circulation has increased anyway ? Cocaine being easy to traffic due to its resemblance with sugar and due to some corrupt officials could be possible reasons for its increased use. However, deeds of few corrupt officials and lack of vigilance techniques are certainly not in agreement with the enforcement efforts. Hence once again, it is improper to buttress the argument with enforcement efforts.
In sum, the author has wrongly brought in a causal relationship between growth of cocaine circulation and increased vigilance. Statistical inadequacy apart, this reasoning is completely fallacious and far from even being seen as an irony. Drug abuse is a grave concern, but appropriately searching the root cause would be beneficial for the community.
Nine-tenths of wisdom is being wise in time ~Theodore Roosevelt
