Argument:
The following appeared in a science magazine:
"The "Space Race" of the 1960's between the USA and Russia was very expensive but it yielded a tremendous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The benefits have more than paid for the effort and money spent during the Space Race and therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020."
Analysis:
The argument states that the Space Race of 1960's between USA and Russia, though expensive, had led to numerous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The effort and money spent was worth spending as compared to the benefits received. In the preceding statement the author claims that"therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020". Though this claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue in author's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The Space Race during 1960's was expensive but the comparison is made between only USA and Russia, for example, it may not have been expensive for china etc. The technological advances may have provided economic and humanitarian benefits but what were those benefits is not mentioned by the author, for instance, did these benefits really helped people or it was only beneficial for the government etc. The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack and legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The technological advances that provided economic and humanitarian benefits during the 1960's may have been due to the initial stage of the Space Race, but this does not necessarily mean that benefits received during that time are the same as benefits received presently. The technological advances may have been more or less as compared to the past. It is also possible that after the space Race there has not been many inventions etc. Also, the assumption made by the author that the benefits received by spending effort and money during 1960's will be the same as effort and money spent for manned Mars landing by 2020. The present scenario may be different i.e. it is possible that government may not be able to manage their budget. It may be going more than expected or not, no information is provided for the same.The author weakens his argument by failing to provide explication of links between Present and Past he assumes exists.
While the author does have some key issues in his premieses and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The author can provide more examples to suuport his arguement. He can give more details as to why the Space Race of the 1960's was successful and why the benefits were more than paid for the effort and money spent. He could give examples as to why the government should plan the manned mars landing by 2020 etc. Though there are several issues with author's reasoning at present, with research and clarfication he could improve his arguemnt singnificantly.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on several unsupported premises and unsusbtantiated assumptions that render is conlusion invalid. The argument has failed to establish comparison between prensent and past. The author has not given completed imformation as to why 1960's space Race was successful and even if it were why will the manned Mars landing in 2020 will be succesful. If the author truly hopes to change his readers mind, he would have to largely resturecture his argument.
The following appeared in a science magazine:
"The "Space Race" of the 1960's between the USA and Russia was very expensive but it yielded a tremendous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The benefits have more than paid for the effort and money spent during the Space Race and therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020."
Analysis:
The argument states that the Space Race of 1960's between USA and Russia, though expensive, had led to numerous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The effort and money spent was worth spending as compared to the benefits received. In the preceding statement the author claims that"therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020". Though this claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue in author's reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The Space Race during 1960's was expensive but the comparison is made between only USA and Russia, for example, it may not have been expensive for china etc. The technological advances may have provided economic and humanitarian benefits but what were those benefits is not mentioned by the author, for instance, did these benefits really helped people or it was only beneficial for the government etc. The author's premises, the basis for his argument, lack and legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion unacceptable.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The technological advances that provided economic and humanitarian benefits during the 1960's may have been due to the initial stage of the Space Race, but this does not necessarily mean that benefits received during that time are the same as benefits received presently. The technological advances may have been more or less as compared to the past. It is also possible that after the space Race there has not been many inventions etc. Also, the assumption made by the author that the benefits received by spending effort and money during 1960's will be the same as effort and money spent for manned Mars landing by 2020. The present scenario may be different i.e. it is possible that government may not be able to manage their budget. It may be going more than expected or not, no information is provided for the same.The author weakens his argument by failing to provide explication of links between Present and Past he assumes exists.
While the author does have some key issues in his premieses and assumptions that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The author can provide more examples to suuport his arguement. He can give more details as to why the Space Race of the 1960's was successful and why the benefits were more than paid for the effort and money spent. He could give examples as to why the government should plan the manned mars landing by 2020 etc. Though there are several issues with author's reasoning at present, with research and clarfication he could improve his arguemnt singnificantly.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on several unsupported premises and unsusbtantiated assumptions that render is conlusion invalid. The argument has failed to establish comparison between prensent and past. The author has not given completed imformation as to why 1960's space Race was successful and even if it were why will the manned Mars landing in 2020 will be succesful. If the author truly hopes to change his readers mind, he would have to largely resturecture his argument.
