ARGUMENT216 3.15

longxuUID: 2290268

TOPIC:ARGUMENT216 - The following appeared in a magazine article about planning forretirement.

"Becauseof its spectacular natural beauty and consistent climate, Clearview should be atop choice for anyone seeking a place to retire. As a bonus, housing costs inClearview have fallen significantly during the past year, and real estate taxesremain lower than those in neighboring towns. Nevertheless, Clearview's mayorpromises many new programs to improve schools, streets, and public services.Retirees in Clearview can also expect excellent health care as they grow older,since the number of physicians in the area is far greater than the nationalaverage."
WORDS:462          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-3-15

The arguer claims that Clearview(C) shouldbe a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire. To justify the conclusionthe arguer presents some evidence about housing cost, taxes, health care condition and the promise from C's mayor. However, theassumptions that whether the condition of C is a top choice for anybody whoseek a place to retire are dubious on several grounds, rendering the argumentwholly unpersuasive as it stands.

First of all, the arguer unfairly assumesthat the evidence of housing costs and real estate taxes is strong enough toattract the people. However, the arguer fails to presents the clear informationabout the cost. Even though the taxes are lower than those in neighboringtowns, it is entirely possible that the taxes are still much more than the standardof the whole country. And, the housing costs are possible too high for thepeople to afford. Thus, unless the arguer presents more clear information aboutthe costs and taxes, we cannot accept the charge in C is low enough for thepeople seeking places to retire.

Next point, the assumption about thepromise of the C's mayor is unconvincing. The arguer demonstrates no evidencethat the promise of the mayor will be carried out. Perhaps, the situation ofschool will be greatly improved after many years, and the people who live therewith no children will not think the improvements are meaningful for them. Thus,lacking the evidence that the people who seek for a place to retire are notsatisfied with the school, streets and the public services in C, the assumptionof the arguer cannot be substantial.

Last but not least, the assumption thathealth care will be improved due to number of physicians seems logical butstill cannot be interpreted. Number of physicians cannot make sure that thehealth care in C will be excellent. Heath care involves many factors, not onlythe aspects which can be solved by the physician. And, the quality of thephysicians is not provided in the argument. Consequently, we cannot accept the assumption that the health care canbe excellent, if the arguer supplies no evident to support the assumption.

To sum up, the argument is indeed not logicalunsound with the existing evidence and flawed assumptions about C' conditionand advantage. To better assess it, I need to know more information about: (1)whether the costs and taxes are low and can be afforded by the people seeking aplace to retire; (2) whether the people who seek for a place to retire are notsatisfied with the school, streets and the public services in C; (3) whetherthe health care can be excellent in that the number of physicians in C is fargreater than the national average. To bolster it, the arguer should alsopresents more evidence about other aspects about C. After all, the aforementionedfactors are not enough for the people who are seeking for a place to retire.