argument 101

xiaobao963UID: 2596307

In this memo, the president concludes that the new version of Wheat-O should make their company benefit, and be good for the health of customers. To justify his argument, the presidents cited the evidence that subjects eating soybeans at least five times every week had very lower cholesterol levels than ones who ate no soy products. Accordingly, he asserts they can increase the sales by selling Wheat-O cereals that are fortifying with soy protein to additional consumers who are concerned about their health. However, a careful analysis of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
First of all, the conclusion presented by the president is based on the assumption that there is a necessary casual relationship between the eating soybeans and low cholesterol level. However, the argument fails to provide the evidence to prove this point. Therefore, there may be other factors that could have caused the lower cholesterol for subjects who ate soybeans. Perhaps, subjects who ate soybeans were just the people who were taking pills decreasing cholesterol levels and the subjects who ate no soybeans did not.
In addition, even assuming low cholesterol levels is attributable to the eating soybeans, the presidents relies on additional assumption that the soy protein contained in soybeans is just reason why subjects eating soybeans had a lower cholesterol. However, it is entirely possible other substance contained in soybeans make an beneficial effect for low cholesterol level. At the same time, fortifying our Wheat-O cereals with any substance should do concrete research to make sense that whether this kind of substance have no any unpleasant side effect or whether it is tasteful for the consumers, and so on. Without providing these facets of information, it is unconvincing to arrive at the president’s conclusion.
Finally, there are extremely evident fallacious assertions that “We can increase sales by appealing to additional consumers who are concerned about their health.” Clearly, it is very difficult to find a consumer who is not concerned about his health nowadays. On the other hand, the argument of increasing profits is suspect, because it is very complex thing decided by other factors such as markets, competitors, administration, cost, and so on. Perhaps better maneuvers made by competitors contribute their company decreasing profits.
In summary, due to failure for establishing a causal relationship between eating soybeans and low cholesterol and making a concrete research about the role played by soy protein, the conclusion cannot convince me. In addition to strength the arguments, the president should make a more serious analysis about whether it certainly help improve the profits.