AWA ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in a print advertisement for a dietary supplement:
"According to a recent study, professional bodybuilders who used Train & Gain, a new protein supplement, over the course of three months experienced an increase in measured strength of up to 20%. Since Train & Gain is now available without prescription at all major pharmacies, superior results are no longer limited to professional athletes. Try Train & Gain today and you too can boost your strength and achieve professional-level performance in just a few months."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
MY RESPONSE:
The print advertisement for a dietary supplement claims that consumers can boost their strength and achieve professional level performance by just trying their dietary supplement over a couple of months. The reasoning presented to support the claim is that earlier, due to its limited availability to only specific group of population, the benefits could not be harnessed by normal consumers. The reasoning in itself is flawed because of the following reasons presented below.
First, the results presented are only for a specific group of population and these results cannot be correlated to the general consumers. Moreover, the data presented states that upto 20% gain in the measured strength is witnessed for these consumers. It may be possible that most of the bodybuilders did not witness any gain in their strength and only 10% of the diet supplement consumers gained strength. So, it is not guarantee that anyone who consumes this diet supplement will gain professional strength.
Second flaw in the above argument is that the author assumes that with the availability of dietary supplement at the pharmacy stores, consumers will willingly go and purchase the product. This will in turn increase their professional strength. However, it may so happen that most of the consumers still do not take the pain of visiting their nearby stores and buy the product.The benefit of gaining strength is then out of question.
The print advertisement could have made this argument more convincing had they provided sufficient evidence to support their claim. Just by presenting additional data about the number of bodybuilders consuming the dietary supplement and percentage of those gaining strength would have made the situation more clear for the consumers.
On the whole, the argument in itself is flawed because of the above stated reasons and cannot stand on its own. The author could have done better by providing various evidences in the favor of argument which would have helped in explaining the results better to their targeted audience.
The following appeared in a print advertisement for a dietary supplement:
"According to a recent study, professional bodybuilders who used Train & Gain, a new protein supplement, over the course of three months experienced an increase in measured strength of up to 20%. Since Train & Gain is now available without prescription at all major pharmacies, superior results are no longer limited to professional athletes. Try Train & Gain today and you too can boost your strength and achieve professional-level performance in just a few months."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
MY RESPONSE:
The print advertisement for a dietary supplement claims that consumers can boost their strength and achieve professional level performance by just trying their dietary supplement over a couple of months. The reasoning presented to support the claim is that earlier, due to its limited availability to only specific group of population, the benefits could not be harnessed by normal consumers. The reasoning in itself is flawed because of the following reasons presented below.
First, the results presented are only for a specific group of population and these results cannot be correlated to the general consumers. Moreover, the data presented states that upto 20% gain in the measured strength is witnessed for these consumers. It may be possible that most of the bodybuilders did not witness any gain in their strength and only 10% of the diet supplement consumers gained strength. So, it is not guarantee that anyone who consumes this diet supplement will gain professional strength.
Second flaw in the above argument is that the author assumes that with the availability of dietary supplement at the pharmacy stores, consumers will willingly go and purchase the product. This will in turn increase their professional strength. However, it may so happen that most of the consumers still do not take the pain of visiting their nearby stores and buy the product.The benefit of gaining strength is then out of question.
The print advertisement could have made this argument more convincing had they provided sufficient evidence to support their claim. Just by presenting additional data about the number of bodybuilders consuming the dietary supplement and percentage of those gaining strength would have made the situation more clear for the consumers.
On the whole, the argument in itself is flawed because of the above stated reasons and cannot stand on its own. The author could have done better by providing various evidences in the favor of argument which would have helped in explaining the results better to their targeted audience.
