argument 45

bufeitianshiUID: 2880182

ARGUMENT45 - The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."

In this argument the editorial of this newsletter concludes that the fact that the arctic deer are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea leads to the decline in the population. To justify the conclusion, the author cites the reports from local hunters who assert that the deer populations are declining, which coincide with recent global warming trends, the reasons why the sea ice is melting. At first glance, the author’s claim seems to be somewhat convincing, however, close scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it accomplishes little toward supporting the author’s claim. From the logical perspective, the argument suffers from several critical logic flaws, as discussed below.

The threshold problem with the argument involves that the author fails to provide evidence to substantiate whether the reports that the deer populations are declining from the hunters are reliable. It is highly possible that those hunters are not so experience as their predecessors, who are far better at finding arctic deer. Without ruling out this and other alternatives, I just cannot believe that the population is declining, let along the global warming should take responsibility for the decline.

Even if the report in term of the population decline is true, the author unfairly assumes that the global warming trend can be applied to the Canada’s arctic region. It is highly possible that the global trend has no effect on this region at all. For that matter, deer can continue their patterns across the frozen sea, and the global warming has nothing to do with the decline.


Even if Canada’s arctic region where the deer live suffers from global warming, we cannot draw the conclusion safely that it is the only reason for the decline just because they occur at the same time. This is fallacious reasoning unless other possible causal explanation have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps the increasing number of hunters is the mean reason. Or perhaps, the deer’s natural enemies are becoming more rampant than ever. Yet another possibility is that the plants the deer live on are blasted. Consequently, without a more comprehensive analysis of the causes of the decline of the deer population, it is presumptuous for the author to claim that the decline is determined solely by the global warming.

Additionally, even if the sea ice of Canada’s arctic region melt as a result of the global warming, and the deer are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea, it does not necessarily lead to the decline in deer population, deer may adapt themselves to the new weather by certain means. Obviously, the author fails to take this into consideration.

To sum up, as it stands this argument is wholly unpersuasive. To make this argument more logically acceptable, the author must provide concrete evidence that the local hunters’ reports are reliable. In addition, the author should provide additional evidence as well to demonstrate that the global warming trends do have effects on the specific region mentioned by the editorial. To better assess the argument it would also be useful to know that it is not other alternative factors that cause the decline. Also, further detailed information regarding the deer’s adaptability to the weather change must be presented. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal.