identify the premises of the argument and its conclusion, and discuss loopholes
ID: 3770999 • Letter: I
Question
identify the premises of the argument and its conclusion, and discuss loopholes if the argument is invalid.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently proposed a ban on selling soft beverages in containers larger than 16 ounces. The intent of the ban is to alleviate the high levels of obesity in NYC, which contributes to diabetes and heart disease. The soft beverage industry has countered the ban with the view that the ban offends against liberty and freedom. Below are some le-mails from residents of NYC to the local newspaper on Staten Island, The Staten Island Advance. Analyze their reasoning—you will have to reconstruct their texts as arguments. All of them were published in the Saturday, July 28th, 2012 issue.
1. NYSERDA: I appreciate that Bloomberg offers suggestions, but take offense at him forcing his ideas down our throats. There should be a line that the mayor should not cross. Maybe we should demand that the mayor’s roles and power be redefined.
Explanation / Answer
The arguement is about the fact that the soft beverage industry wants to sell their products and supports the liberty and freedom of the people that they should be allowed to eat and drink whatever they want without any intereference from the mayor. The company's basic idea is to keep their business flourishing and booming irrespective of high levels of ounces that could lead to obesity.The company is using the reasons of freedom and liberty of people to survive in the market even though it right so that customers are not affected.The company is right to an extent but this can harm the people consuming the products too.The mayor is wrong as well by posing a ban direcly .he should give the company a chance and let them refine their products within a time period ,The mayor decision can affect the customers too who might not be able to purchase the items they normally do. He has no right to put a ban straight away without having a talk with the company regarding the same.
The conclusion according to me is to limit their contaners to 16 ounces or refine their products in order to promote their business and continue productivity by mutual consent with the mayor.
The loopholes in the arguement is that they just want the business to continue without reducing it to 16 ounces and direcly posing an arguement to mayor's thoughts. The best way is to sit down and make an agreement for the company to reduce it to 16 ounces within a given time period and the mayor should lift the ban on company as soon as possible as customers can get affected if they dont get the right and healthy products on time.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.