The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts:
“In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The memorandum issued by a large city's council on arts states that some of the city's funds for supporting arts should be reallocated to the public television.This line of reasoning is given based on the findings of the recent poll conducted which reported that 15 percent more residents watch television programs about visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted 5 years ago. During the same timeframe, similar percentage increase has been visible on the number of people visiting the city's art museums.At first glance, the argument appears to be fairly convincing and coherent.However, upon closer examination, several assumptions, dubious facts and unsubstantiated reasoning crop up rendering the argument wholly unpersuasive.
To begin with, the memorandum cites percentage increase in the museums visitation and watching of television programs in a similar manner based on the poll conducted.But, the exact base from which the percentage increase took place is not stated.Mere mentioning of the percentage increase without the base value can be very misleading.For instance, 15 percent of 100 visitors make it 115. But 15 percent of 1000 visitors make it 150.Thus, proper information of the base value is needed to validate and conclusion drawn out of it.
Furthermore, on the basis of the recent poll conducted, a direct correlation is being drawn between the museum visitations and visual television program watchers, which is faulty.It is being assumed that only the visual art programs aired on the television is the cause for the increase in the art museum attendance.Yes, it is possible that this might be a huge factor in contributing to the increase in the number of people visitations, but many other factors can affect it too.For example, maybe newly prized artefacts that have been displayed in the past 5 years, have caught the interest of many people or some new art related discovery in the town has caused a spike in interest among the people.
Moreover, the slash of the corporate funds to public television is just being threatened.We cannot expect that this alone will lead to the decrease in the number of at museum visitations.Going further, if this would really affect the number of visitations, why not try to allocate that funding to develop the visual content site or improvement on the art museum instead.Dependancy on the television will be less and the video content shows can run independently.
In a nutshell, the argument stated to allocate some of the city's art funds to public television is not compelling enough.In order to convince the people, more information needs to be provided.A thorough analysis regarding the same also needs to be carried out and confirm whether the reason cited was indeed the only factor operating in the equation or not.
argument 1 -- not OK. There is nothing wrong with the percentage or base value. anyway, the percentage has increased, no matter it is15%, or 1%. or base value is 100 or 1000.
here we need to put them together:
In a recent citywide poll, 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage.
like you did in the argument 2.
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not OK. look at the argument:
Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease.
the funding is for all TV programs, while the funding for visual arts programs may keep the same.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 468 350
No. of Characters: 2296 1500
No. of Different Words: 229 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.651 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.906 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.69 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 173 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 58.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 18.615 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.455 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.804 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.098 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5