• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Second, the argument assumes that Yuppie Café is representative of all other businesses, e.g., your own business. This creates a representative sample assumption. It may even be true that the Internet does help highly customer-oriented companies with their businesses, e.g., coffee shops, health spas, and book distribution companies. But what about an oil-and-gas or mining company? Obviously, it is difficult to generalize from a single example to all other companies.

Third, the argument assumes that other companies actually own computers, have access to the Internet in order to place company advertisements, and employ personnel capable of administering the system. Furthermore, the argument assumes that a company has the money or other financial wherewithal to spend on Internet advertising. Moreover, the argument assumes that the money a company spends on Internet advertising does not outweigh the revenues to be derived from increased sales. These considerations create implementation assumptions.

Fourth, the argument assumes that a 15% increase in business is the same as a 15% increase in profit. The word “business increase” likely refers to revenues, but, as we know, revenues and profit are not the same thing. Profit depends on the relationship between costs, revenues, and sales volume. Furthermore, the words “business increase” are vague. For example, a 15% increase in the number of customers served may not translate to a 15% increase in revenues or profits, particularly if the retail price of a cup of coffee has been significantly reduced or increased.

In conclusion, to strengthen this argument we need more information to substantiate the cause-and-effect relationship between advertising and an increase in business. We need more examples in order to show that Yuppie Café is not merely an exceptional business example. We need some assurance that companies have access to the Internet in the first place. We also need clarification as to whether an increase in business translates to an increase in revenues and/or whether an increase in revenues translates to an increase in profit.

One word — “success” — is particularly vague and needs clarification. Is a 15% increase in business a worthy criterion for “success”? To a venture capitalist, success might be defined by a return of 50% or more. Furthermore, should success be measured merely along a quantitative dimension? What about the qualitative dimensions of employee or consumer satisfaction? Finally, softening the wording in the original argument could strengthen the argument. The original sentence states, “Their success shows you how you too can use the Internet to make your business more profitable.” The wording could read, “Their success shows how you too can probably use the Internet to make your business more profitable,” or “Their success shows how a number of companies can use the Internet to make their businesses more profitable.”

Back to problem

CHAPTER 5 – MASTERING LOGIC

Problem 31: Chemist

Choice B. This problem highlights the fallacy of affirming the consequent. The circle representing chemists appears inside the bigger circle representing scientists, so all chemists are definitely scientists. But the reverse is not true. Not all scientists are chemists; other than chemists, there are many types of scientists, including biologists and physicists.

In choices A and D, the first part of each statement is correct while the latter half is incorrect. Choices C and E are both totally incorrect.

Back to problem

Problem 32: Intricate Plots

Choice C. The last line of the introductory blurb gives us an “if … then” statement which serves as the passage’s conclusion “If scriptwriting is to remain a significant art form, its practitioners must continue to craft intricate plots.” In determining what the author would most probably agree with, we need to look for logically deducible statements. Choice C, the correct answer, forms the contrapositive. “If a script does not