Argument:
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen
foods:
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become
more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day
service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And
since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to
minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
My reply:
============================================
The report calims that as Olympic food is in the business since last 25 years, it will be able to minimize costs and maximize profits. The line of resoning for mentioned argument is derived by citing account of a phenomenon happened in color film processing industry. The argument is unconvincing as it uses faulty comparision and makes questionable assumpations.
Firstly, the chief reason on which argument stands has a logical flaw. Indeed, cost of color film processing has decreased over period of time. However, time spent is not the only cause of decrease. Cheaper cost for color film development should be mainly attributed to technology advances that has made process faster and more economical. Author misses to consider this factor in the conclusion.
Also, author assumes that a situation occurred in one electronic industry will repeat in totally different food industry. This is faulty assumpation. Both industries have different significance and different consumer market. So, a phenomenon of one industy can not be generalized and used to predict situation of different industy.
However, it is correct that as a company matures in its process over period of time, cost can be minimized and profit can be maximized. But experience in terms of time is not the only factor to consider. If author also gives account of technical advances, better used processes, quality team then this argument can be made pursuasive.
In sum, weak comparision and faulty assumption make this argument unconvincible.
============================================
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen
foods:
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become
more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day
service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And
since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to
minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
My reply:
============================================
The report calims that as Olympic food is in the business since last 25 years, it will be able to minimize costs and maximize profits. The line of resoning for mentioned argument is derived by citing account of a phenomenon happened in color film processing industry. The argument is unconvincing as it uses faulty comparision and makes questionable assumpations.
Firstly, the chief reason on which argument stands has a logical flaw. Indeed, cost of color film processing has decreased over period of time. However, time spent is not the only cause of decrease. Cheaper cost for color film development should be mainly attributed to technology advances that has made process faster and more economical. Author misses to consider this factor in the conclusion.
Also, author assumes that a situation occurred in one electronic industry will repeat in totally different food industry. This is faulty assumpation. Both industries have different significance and different consumer market. So, a phenomenon of one industy can not be generalized and used to predict situation of different industy.
However, it is correct that as a company matures in its process over period of time, cost can be minimized and profit can be maximized. But experience in terms of time is not the only factor to consider. If author also gives account of technical advances, better used processes, quality team then this argument can be made pursuasive.
In sum, weak comparision and faulty assumption make this argument unconvincible.
============================================
