"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."
Response::
In the argument above the author claims that since each generation of Americans has lived longer than the ones preceding it, most of the children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety. Though this claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on questionable premise and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author has to offer we cannot accept this argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in his premise. The author states that each generation of Americans has lived longer than the ones preceding it, as the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in recent years. This claim is flawed as the author fails to present information regarding the life expectancy of the previous years, it may be the case that the number of teenage and infant deaths were the the highest in the past 20 years. It is also possible that due to an epidemic the number of deaths increased in the past few years and that very few people lived up to the age of 80 years. The authors premise, the basis for his argument, lacks legitimate evidentiary support and renders his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition, the author makes assumptions which remain unproven. The author assumes that only medical technology is sufficient to maintain a healthy life, and live for a longer period. However, a healthy life depends on more than medical technology, such as a healthy diet, clean and tidy surroundings, pollution free environment, and a long life is not guaranteed by mere advancement in medical technology, it is possible that there will be an epidemic outbreak, or war in the near future which would result in millions of deaths. The author weakens his argument by making such assumptions and failing to provide explications of the same.
The author can strengthen his argument by providing more information and statistical charts to show that life expectancy has evidently increased in the past few years. He can further strengthen his argument by stating the possible advancement in various other fields apart from medical technologies, such as clean and healthy surroundings, a long lasting alliance with no war with any country etc.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unproven premise and unsubstantiated assumptions. If the author intends to change his readers' minds he will have to highly restructure his argument, clearly explicate his assumptions, correct the flaws in his reasoning and provide evidentiary proof to support his claim.
Response::
In the argument above the author claims that since each generation of Americans has lived longer than the ones preceding it, most of the children born in America in the next decade will live past the age of ninety. Though this claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on questionable premise and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence the author has to offer we cannot accept this argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in his premise. The author states that each generation of Americans has lived longer than the ones preceding it, as the national life expectancy has approached 80 years old in recent years. This claim is flawed as the author fails to present information regarding the life expectancy of the previous years, it may be the case that the number of teenage and infant deaths were the the highest in the past 20 years. It is also possible that due to an epidemic the number of deaths increased in the past few years and that very few people lived up to the age of 80 years. The authors premise, the basis for his argument, lacks legitimate evidentiary support and renders his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition, the author makes assumptions which remain unproven. The author assumes that only medical technology is sufficient to maintain a healthy life, and live for a longer period. However, a healthy life depends on more than medical technology, such as a healthy diet, clean and tidy surroundings, pollution free environment, and a long life is not guaranteed by mere advancement in medical technology, it is possible that there will be an epidemic outbreak, or war in the near future which would result in millions of deaths. The author weakens his argument by making such assumptions and failing to provide explications of the same.
The author can strengthen his argument by providing more information and statistical charts to show that life expectancy has evidently increased in the past few years. He can further strengthen his argument by stating the possible advancement in various other fields apart from medical technologies, such as clean and healthy surroundings, a long lasting alliance with no war with any country etc.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unproven premise and unsubstantiated assumptions. If the author intends to change his readers' minds he will have to highly restructure his argument, clearly explicate his assumptions, correct the flaws in his reasoning and provide evidentiary proof to support his claim.
