Another Argument from my archive:
“Two years ago, City L was listed 14th in an annual survey that ranks cities according to the quality of life that can be enjoyed by those living in them. This information will enable people who are moving to the state in which City L is located to confidently identify one place, at least, where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe, and the arts flourish.”
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.
I do not agree with the author’s conclusion that City L will provide all the aminities to the new people moving to the state in which City L is located. The argument depends upon several assumption and insufficient data. I have listed down 4 reasons why I donot agree with argument.
First, the author doesnt mention anything about the sample size of survey conducted. Did the survey include all major cities? What if the the survey did not include the other cities which also provide all the stated aminities? More importantly, did the survey include all other cities of the state at least? If the survey did not include such cities then it is highly likely that City L can rank much higher than it may actually deserve.
Second, how many total cities were covered in the survey? If there were only 14 city covered in the survey and City L was ranked at 14 then it shows that City L is actually not so better place as one might have assumed.
Third, the survey was done almost 2 years ago. The statement rest on assumption that many factors, which contributed the shortlisting city, might have changed. For example, a major earthquake hit the city 1 year back which destroyed the basic city infrastructure severly. In this case it will not be wise for anyone to move to City L until its infrastructure is revived. Hence such outdated survey data can not provide the sufficient info to make a choice.
Fourth, the survey mentioned 4 basic factors – good schools, affordable housing, friendly people, safe enviorment – that make City L a good choice. However what if the employment opportunities available at City L are not adequate? In such case it will not provide growth opportunities to the parents which can affect the standard of living of whole family. So these 4 factors are not sufficient to make a decision.
However, the author’s statement can be strengthened if survey sample size included all major national cities and hence puts City L at much higher rank in comparision. The statment can also be strengthened if it’s shown that not much has changed in the factors contributing the choice of City L above others in last 2 years. This improves the validity of survey. References to other factors to quality of life in survey can also help to make the argument much stronger.