Group #3: Analysis of Argument
It is true that 200 apartment renters protested in the rain about the elimination of rent control regulation. However, there are 20,000 renters in the entire city. 19,800 of them stayed home and did not protest. The group that did not protest is much larger and better represents the opinion of renters throughout the city that the elimination of rent control is not a problem. You should not let the small protest discourage you.
Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument claims that 200 apartment renters protested about the
elimination of rent control regulation,however ,there are 20,000 renters in the
entire city.19,800 stayed home and did not protest.So,the larger group did not
protest and better represents opinion of renters throughout the city that the
elimination is not a problem.Stated in this way the argument fails to mention
several key factors ,on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated.The
conclusion relies upon assumption,for which there are no clear
evidences.Hence,the argument is rather weak,unconvincing,and has several
First,the argument readily assumes that there are only 200 renters who
protested about the rent control regulation.The argument by stating this fails to
consider the time frame in which different set of renters could protest.For
instance, 200 renters protested yesterday there could be more protesters on
coming days.So,the statistics may not be true.Furthermore,there could be a
situation where in these 200 protesters represented all 20,000
renters.Clearly,the statement that argument made is a stretch and an
unsubstantiated one.It is more of a wishful thinking than a proper reasoning
given for such a small representation of protesters.The argument could have
been made more sound,had the statistics given looked more justified.
Second,the argument assumes that the figure 19,800 protesters who stayed
home and did not protest are with the elimination of rent control regulation.This
statement is an exaggerated one and can be baseless as there is no rationale
behind it that could be used to prove that the figure who stayed home are with
the elimination of regulation and are not neutral or are protesters, but were not
able to make to the protest.The figure itself doesn't prove that the 19,800
renters were with the elimination of regulation without proper examples and
surveying of the renters about their opinion.This way argument fails to consider
the opinion of 19,800 renters and just assumes that as they wee not able to
make it to the protest implies that they are with the politician's move.
Finally,the argument concludes that the group that did not protest is much
larger and better represents the opinion of renters throughout the city that the
elimination of rent control is not a problem.Argument by stating this fails to
consider other important aspects like surveying of renters who did not make to
the protest,whether they are neutral to the situation,whether they wanted to
protest and were not able to make it to the protest.The conclusion has no legs
to stand on as the argument doesn't provides examples that proves that
19,800 renters were with the elimination of rent control.
Implicitly,the argument is weak for the above stated reasons.It could be
strengthened if author gave proper examples proving that the renters who
stayed home were with the politician's move and not with the protesters.For a
sound argument there should not be any logical gap that exists between
premise and the conclusion.
source: 800 score
Plz Correct me if I am deviating somewhere!!
Consider KUDOS if the post was informative!!