Call Support +91-85588-96644


Sign Up

Please enter a Username or Email ID
Please enter a password
Keep me logged in
Please enter your name
Please enter your mobile number
You can't leave Captcha Code empty
By submitting this form, you agree to the Terms & Privacy Policy.

Sign Up via Facebook

Sign Up via Google

Sign Up via Twitter

Download Software
Tests given

Download TCY App

App Image


(44 Posts)

Post and discuss tips and tricks for building assertive and convincing arguments

Question should not exceed 100 characters.Use add options for multiple choice questions and "Uploadimage/Add related data" for passage text papers.
Question should be at least 10 characters long.
Add Options | Community Guidelines
Posted on Apr 14, 2015 5:50 PM

The development office at Platonic University has provided a suggestion to evaluate ways of improving the revenue for overcoming there expenses. They further build up by addressing one potential solution by following what one of the universities has done. Greene University has been able to increase their revenues by accepting $100 million sum of donation by renaming themselves after the donor and the development office proposes a similar activity as a way to increase the quantity of donation.
The argument sounds plausible but there are some logical flaws. Firstly, the argument is silent about the location of Greene University and the circumstances at which they were able to receive their donation. Secondly, the renaming of a university may result loss in the market value of the brand name and the recognition of the university. Thirdly, advertising to a homogeneous group of people may not result in increasing the amount of donations.
The first flaw creates a false analogy. That is, the method adopted by Greene University may not work for Platonic University as the argument is silent on certain external factors. Greene University may be located where large majority could be of wealthy people who can afford such a donation. Methodology for the advertisement for donation could have played much important role. People could have reacted differently knowing the actual usage of the donation.
The second flaw is the assumption that renaming of the university is the only way of receiving or increasing donations and the after effects. Extrinsic factors could have their toll. People may not be able to recognize the achievements of the university and may result in reducing the amount of enrollments for the future. A brand works on its created market identity. Renaming may change the university image and popularity and students might not want to enroll for a university who are not well recognized.
Thirdly, by advertising to wealthy people only may not increase the number of donations. Revenue may not be affected much by the number of donations but could be by the sum of donation. The nature of the people gets them to donate rather than the wealth they attain. University could achieve more if they address to a heterogeneous group of people than one category.
Thus, the argument is not logically convincing. The evidence provided to support the conclusion failed to address the above mentioned flaws. The argument could have been strengthened and made more reliable. The development office could access the expenses incurred to generate revenue and create more elaborate proposal.

Please type your answer before submitting.

Very good effort Sabinder. There are just one or two spelling errors, which can be ignored. Rest is absolutely fine. Elaborate on your points that's it.

Posted on Apr 09, 2015 10:27 PM

The author for a consumer-products magazine states that there are 2 kinds of medication available for curing excessive acid build up and that those are available in mild non prescriptive and super strength prescriptive forms. He further provides a fact that doctors have prescribed strongest Acid-ease more than strongest Pepticaid and concludes in the end that this is the big enough reason for showing the effectiveness of milder form of Acid-ease over the other milder medicine.
The argument seems plausible but there are some logical flaws. Firstly, the author is silent on the time and the duration when the survey was conducted. Secondly, the argument does not state the group of people study might have been carried out. Thirdly, the author presumes the effectiveness on wrong cause and effect relationship that since the stronger of the Acid-ease worked well does not imply the milder would have similar results.
The first flaw is that the study on which the author believes could be flawed in itself. It could have been true that more prescriptions of stronger Acid-ease happened at a time when there was no stronger Pepticaid available in the market and that the study might have been concluded by the time it was made available. The doctors considered for the claim might have been biased and could have been working on for achieving own goals in terms of addition in their incomes. If the circumstances on the study were provided, the claim could have been convincing.
Secondly, the study may have been carried out on a homogenous group of people and that the location may be abundant in those certain type. The effectiveness of a medicine could be more in older than younger group of people or in women as compared to men. If the author was provided with such information, his conclusion might have been different.
Thirdly, the conclusion of the author states wrong cause and effect relation. The efficiency of milder Acid-ease may not be similar to the more powerful form of the medicine. It could be dependent on certain external factors. This cannot be the only factor affecting the result. Other details such as pricing, the availability and the side effects of the medicine could be the reasons made to believe in authorís conclusion.
Thus, the argument is not logically convincing. If the above mentioned evidence was supported within the argument, the article would have been strengthened and hence more believable.

Please type your answer before submitting.

Sabinder, more or less you have covered all the important points, but when you started developing on your arguments, things started becoming very clumsy. Somewhere midway the reader loses connect. Try to simplify from "The first flaw...". May be then it could be understood better.

Palakprett Kaur walia
Posted on Mar 02, 2015 7:06 PM

The memorandum is from a Vice president of Alta manufacturing company which states that sleep deprivation is the only cause of on the job accidents in a company .
The author is saying that there was thirty percent increase in the accidents than panoply industries which is having more working hours than ours. So to reduce
the number of accidents they suggested to shorten the working hours by one hour,only then there employees will get adequate sleep.

The argument suffers from many flaws.Firstly the analysis they talk about is only of the previous year ,what happen presently they haven't talk about that so there
might be less accidents.Moreover there is no base value for that as on what grounds they are talking about this value.

Secondly if the company will provide them with the lessen working hours,then how could employees will utilize that time in sleeping.Its not really that important that
this will provide employees adequate sleep . Employees could do anything in that time.

Also he is falsely assuming that fatigue is the only cause of increase in accidents ,there must be many other reasons of accidents ,like the employees of Alta manufacturing company might
not get proper training for the job they have been employed.Moreover there might be work load on employees ,which the employees may not handle properly.There might be
number of staffs employed on one particular machine ,so accidents may occur .In addition to that there could be the mismanagement of machines,not proper lightening and many
other reasons may arise .
In a nutshell,the reason recommended by the author that accidents occur only and only due to sleep deprivation of employees and what I feel is that it is wrong because there
could be many other reasons of accidents and what I suggested ,it could be one of them so to stop the number of accidents firstly they should find the proper cause for that and
only then there could be some solutions for that.

Please type your answer before submitting.
Gagan Mauli
Posted on Jan 02, 2015 11:51 AM

135. The memorandum by the managing director states that the creation of a larger theater would lead to potential increase in ticket sales. He also builds on his case by proposing to screen the plays which have done well in bigger cities and also hiring a new director from Adlib Theater company, who has contributed significantly in the past.

The argument suffers with many flaws. Firstly the size of a theater would not guarantee an increase in ticket sales. This would be dependent on external factors. Secondly, the argument supports screening of plays which have done well in larger cities but is silent about the place where the theater is located. Thirdly, the managing director is positive about hiring a new director who has been successful in her career in another company, but the same may or may not hold true in the current scenario.

Firstly, a large theater size does not mean a direct increase in ticket sales. This would be subject to a lot of external factors e.g. the quality of the screen or the play being played. It hugely depends on the equipment's involved in the theater as well. Extrinsic factors like the location where the theater is or the kind of crowd that it attracts based on its reputation would also effect the ticket sales.

The second flaw that the memorandum supports is screening of plays which have done well in larger cities. However, the success or the popularity of the play depends on how well it connects to the local audience. What has done well in other cities might not necessarily do well here. In order to support this flaw the author has to reason by providing the location of the theater and the general preferences of the people.
Thirdly, hiring a new director could initiate new processes in the existing work culture however it might not support the authors argument. The Adlib Theater company's director could be performing significantly in the past due to other factors like the company's reputation or the kind of product offering. The same might be very different in the current scenario. She may or may not be effective in increasing the fund raising contribution to Exeunt Theater Company. Thus her hiring does not solely support the theater's success.

Thus, if the flaws mentioned above would have been addressed in the argument, it could have led the reader to believe in the memorandum written by the managing director.

Please type your answer before submitting.

Gagan an Excellent response. Crisp, neat and to the point. I would just like to make 1 suggestion, i.e. try to elaborate on the flaw and explain how it muddles the conclusion. If this elaboration is available, I am sure that this response would fetch something between 4-5. Good Job . Keep it up.

Posted on Dec 31, 2014 12:21 PM

The editor of a corporate newsletter negates the old notion that the workers are generally passive about the management issues by constructing his claim on a recently published survey, where 79% of around 1200 workers, who filled questionnaires, showed interest in topics of corporate reconstructing and redesigning of benefits programs.

This argument suffers with many flaws which the editor may have overlooked. Firstly, the sample size may not be large enough to construct the given conclusion. Also, the sample size has not been defined properly in terms of type of workers. Secondly, the argument is silent about the body/authority conducting the survey, which may be conducted by the management itself. Also the methodology of the authority is unknown. Thirdly, the respondents who were positive, showed interest in topics of corporate reconstructing and remaking of benefit plans, which will directly effect the workers.

The first flaw relates to the sample's size and quality. The sample contains of 1200 respondents, but he company may have employed a million workers, which then weakens the credibility of the size of the sample. Also, the argument is silent about the composition of the respondents. May be the majority of the respondents were a part of management itself, which will affect the outcome of the argument. Has the sample been homogeneous, containing only workers unrelated to management, then the argument would have been more plausible.

The second flaw pertains to the body conducting the survey. If the management itself conducted the survey, the respondents may become defensive in their opinions and fake a positive response. Hence, the results would be severely affected by this defensive stance of the workers. Also, the methodology of the survey could have been better. Instead of interviewing the respondents, where they may fake responses, lie, become defensive etc, observing the respondents would have been better, since their actual behavior will not be affected by any psychological/ emotional charges. Moreover, if the respondent's identity in the survey wasn't anonymous, the results could been deviated form the truth.

The third flaw relates to the topics of concern, shown my the respondents. The workers were readily interested in reconstructing the corporation and rebuilding the benefit schemes. Apparently the employee is always interested where, he may be retrenched or where his incentives may be altered. Hence, this cannot state that the employees are not disinterested in managements' issues, say, reconstruction of capital base, expansion, introduction of a new product, adhering to laws etc.

Thus, if the flaws mentioned above( which are intrinsic to the argument)' were missing, then the editor's conclusion that the workers do take interest in managements' issues would have been more believe, or as a matter of fact more reliable.

Please type your answer before submitting.

Braham, a very good effort. I would recommend this response to all. A few errors pertaining to usage of words exist. I am willing to discount this factor as they are not repetitive in nature to show your writing skills in poor light. But do take care to avoid such errors. For this you can score between 3.5 to 4.5 .Overall a great effort. Keep it up.