Hello,
Can you please rate this essay? I have tried to follow Myohmy's template here. Thanks for your help - Sri
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response:
Consumption of foods like red meat and fatty cheeses has become a very debatabled topic these days. There are those who think that red meat and fatty foods like cheeses are bad whereas there are those who think that meat and foods like cheeses are needed in moderation for a balanced diet. In this argument the author is saying that just because Heart's Delight is selling fatty cheeses and Good Earth Cafe is still making a modest living that people are not regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Though the author might have a point his argument as such is flawed because he relies on several unsubstanatiated premises and questionable assumptions.
The primary flaw with this argument is in the author's questionable premises. The author is saying that just because Heart's Delight a store that was selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flour in the 1960's is also selling high fat cheeses, people are not watching their intake of fatty foods. The author is assuming that any kind of fatty food is bad. Fat's are needed to absord Calcium in the body. Plants, vegetables and whole grain flour are great sources of fiber and calcium but recent studies have shown that some amount of fat is needed to absorb fiber, calcium and vitamins in the blood stream. So by stocking fatty cheeses Heart's Delight might be giving it's customers a more balanced food option. In the case of Good Earth Cafe, it is quite possible that since it is an old vegetarian restaurant, people are maybe bored of the same menu choices and hence the restaurant is making a modest living. The House of Beef might be doing well since it is new and also because profit margins on beef are usually much more which explains why the owners of this restaurant are millionaires.
Another issue with the author's argument lies in his unproven assumptions. Just because Heart's Delight sells cheeses or Good Earth Cafe is making a modest living does not mean that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. The fact that Heart's Delight sells cheeses does not mean that people are not buying fruits, vegetables and whole-grain flours. As noted in the preceding paragraph Heart's Delight might have started selling cheeses because it is now widely believed that some amount of fat is needed for a healthy functioning of the human body. Also, just because an old vegetarian restaurant like Good Earth Cafe is still making a modest living does not mean that people are not eating much vegetarian food. They just must have got tired of the same menu items. The fact that the owners of the new House of Beef are millionaires cannot be used to assume that people are eating more meat than vegetables. New restaurants usually do well for some time since people in general like to try out newer restaurants. The author is assuming a lot of things in this argument and trying to link his assumptions to people's dietary habits.
While the author does have several questionable assumptions and unsubstantiated premises it is not to say that his argument is totally without merit. He could strengthen his argument by quoting evidence and scientific research as to how fatty foods are not good for health. He could also present statitistics that show that people are consuming more red meat now than they were in the previous decades. He could perhaps provide more information about how the Good Earth Cafe has improved its vegetarian menu over the years but still has a declining customer base. Hence by fixing his argument, basing more solid premises and getting rid of questionable assumptions the author can strengthen his argument.
In-all for the reasons explained above this argument is not well reasoned and has several flaws. By in-corporating some of the changes mentioned above the author can strengthen his argument. Because of the flaws in his reasoning, lack of substantiated premises and questionable assumptions the author cannot have a broade audience accept his argument in it's current form.
Can you please rate this essay? I have tried to follow Myohmy's template here. Thanks for your help - Sri
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My response:
Consumption of foods like red meat and fatty cheeses has become a very debatabled topic these days. There are those who think that red meat and fatty foods like cheeses are bad whereas there are those who think that meat and foods like cheeses are needed in moderation for a balanced diet. In this argument the author is saying that just because Heart's Delight is selling fatty cheeses and Good Earth Cafe is still making a modest living that people are not regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Though the author might have a point his argument as such is flawed because he relies on several unsubstanatiated premises and questionable assumptions.
The primary flaw with this argument is in the author's questionable premises. The author is saying that just because Heart's Delight a store that was selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flour in the 1960's is also selling high fat cheeses, people are not watching their intake of fatty foods. The author is assuming that any kind of fatty food is bad. Fat's are needed to absord Calcium in the body. Plants, vegetables and whole grain flour are great sources of fiber and calcium but recent studies have shown that some amount of fat is needed to absorb fiber, calcium and vitamins in the blood stream. So by stocking fatty cheeses Heart's Delight might be giving it's customers a more balanced food option. In the case of Good Earth Cafe, it is quite possible that since it is an old vegetarian restaurant, people are maybe bored of the same menu choices and hence the restaurant is making a modest living. The House of Beef might be doing well since it is new and also because profit margins on beef are usually much more which explains why the owners of this restaurant are millionaires.
Another issue with the author's argument lies in his unproven assumptions. Just because Heart's Delight sells cheeses or Good Earth Cafe is making a modest living does not mean that people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. The fact that Heart's Delight sells cheeses does not mean that people are not buying fruits, vegetables and whole-grain flours. As noted in the preceding paragraph Heart's Delight might have started selling cheeses because it is now widely believed that some amount of fat is needed for a healthy functioning of the human body. Also, just because an old vegetarian restaurant like Good Earth Cafe is still making a modest living does not mean that people are not eating much vegetarian food. They just must have got tired of the same menu items. The fact that the owners of the new House of Beef are millionaires cannot be used to assume that people are eating more meat than vegetables. New restaurants usually do well for some time since people in general like to try out newer restaurants. The author is assuming a lot of things in this argument and trying to link his assumptions to people's dietary habits.
While the author does have several questionable assumptions and unsubstantiated premises it is not to say that his argument is totally without merit. He could strengthen his argument by quoting evidence and scientific research as to how fatty foods are not good for health. He could also present statitistics that show that people are consuming more red meat now than they were in the previous decades. He could perhaps provide more information about how the Good Earth Cafe has improved its vegetarian menu over the years but still has a declining customer base. Hence by fixing his argument, basing more solid premises and getting rid of questionable assumptions the author can strengthen his argument.
In-all for the reasons explained above this argument is not well reasoned and has several flaws. By in-corporating some of the changes mentioned above the author can strengthen his argument. Because of the flaws in his reasoning, lack of substantiated premises and questionable assumptions the author cannot have a broade audience accept his argument in it's current form.
