TOPIC: ARGUMENT234 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"There is now evidence that the relaxed manner of living in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. Furthermore, Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents, but in Mason City the proportion of physicians to residents is five times as high. And the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These findings suggest that people seeking longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities."
In this argument, the author concludes that people seeking longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities. To justify the conclusion the author cites the evidence that the relaxed manner of living in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. In addition, the author compares the proportion of physicians to residents of Leeville and that of Mason city as well as the average age of Leeville and that of the city of Mason. the argument is well presented, but not well reasoned.
First, the argument suffers from hasty generalization. There are all kinds of important differences between the individual workers in small town of Leeville and those in the large city of Mason. For example ,the factories they are working in, the living conditions of the workers, the family and social relationships of the workers, which can totally affect the workers' physical and psycal conditions, which significantly influence the health of workers, but are virtually absent. So it might amount to poor advice for the people to move to small communities if no evidence can be provided to show that the workers in Leeville and those in Mason shares all the conditions equally.
Second, the author fails to perceive that there are many alternatives that influence the proportion of physician to residents. It is unreasonable to draw conclusion that the residents in Leeville is healthier than the ones in the city of Mason based on the proportion of physician to residents. Perhaps the medical conditions in Leeville is much more poor than that of the city of Mason, fewer physicians are willing to work in such condition, thus results in the lower proportion of physician to residents in Leeville. If that is the case, it is folly to concludes that residents in Leeville have a better health and greater longevity.
In addition ,the higher average age of Leeville doesn't necessarily result from the health condition. For example, perhaps the amount of residents in Leeville is much smaller than that of the city of Mason, meanwhile, there are more people of older age in Leeville compared to Mason. thus it is not surprising that the average age in Leeville is significantly higher than that of Mason city. However, it provides no evidence that there are causal relationships between the relaxed manner of living in small towns and the higher average age.
To sum up, the argument is not sound as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author has to provide more clear evidence that the workers in the two place shares the same condition except for the living manner. In order to make it more convincing, the author also has to provide more evidence that the statistics on the average age is based on the generally same equal residents' structure.