. The following appeared in a memorandum from a member of a financial management and consulting firm.

We have learned from an employee of Windfall, Ltd., that its accounting department, by checking about ten percent of the last months purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies, saved the company some $10,000 in overpayments. In order to help our clients increase their net gains, we should advise each of them to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors. Such a recommendation could also help us get the Windfall account by demonstrating to Windfall the rigorousness of our methods. Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

In this argument the arguer concludes that it would be a good idea to advise the firms clients to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that Windfall Ltd. saved $10,000 in over-payments by checking 10 percent of its purchasing invoices for errors. In addition, the arguer reasons that such recommendation could help the firms clients increase their net gains, and it could help the firm land the Windfall account. The argument suffers from several critical flaws. To begin with, the source of the news is not dependable. Lacking information about the position of the employee of Windfall Ltd, it is impossible to assess the validity of his remarks. For example, if the employee is the head of the accounting department, his view would provide strong support for the conclusion. On the other hand, if the employee is only a junior secretary in the company, the conclusion would be much weaker. Next, the problem in purchasing invoices in Windfall cannot reflect the general condition of other companies. For example, the fact that some of Windfalls purchasing invoices contained errors might simply be attributable to the sloppy accounting practices of Windfalls suppliers. Thus, rather than indicating a general problem, the invoice errors might simply be indicative of a problem that is specific to Windfall Ltd. In other words, the evidence drawn from Windfalls experience is insufficient to support the conclusion that all purchasing invoices are subject tosimilar errors. Finally, even if the checking can help avoid errors and inconsistencies, it will not necessarily save money for the company, for the checking itself costs money. If the cost is more than the gains from the errors, the company will lose money. In conclusion, the argument is not convincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the arguer would have to show that the source of the news is reliable. To better evaluate the

argument, the arguer must provide more evidence to prove that purchasing invoices error is a widespread problem in various companies and the gains from the errors are more than the cost of checking. 2.

The argument claims that city L has been listed on number 14th in the annual survey two years ago. This survey ranks all the cities based upon the quality of life enjoyed by the residents living in those cities. Further, the argument states that this particular information from the survey will help people to identity city L as this is the city in the state where one can find good schools, friendly people, affordable houses, safe environment and finally flourishing arts. In this particular argument, the author has come to the conclusion with the help of weak assumptions. The author manipulates the facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws. Firstly, as the author mentions that the survey was taken two years ago. It is not at all clear in the argument whether city L is still at 14th number on the list or not. It might be true that two years ago, the quality life in city L was good, but one should not assume that after two years also, the quality would be the same. It might be possible that the present situation of city L is not good and has come down due to economic factors such as inflation, pricing theories etc. Two years is quite a big time, and it is plausible to acknowledge many changes within that period of time. Therefore, only by depending upon a survey, that too two years old, would never be helpful to anyone who is moving in the state. The argument would have been much clearer, if the author had cited the present day or current survey of the city ranking. Secondly, not all surveys are right and up up to the mark. There are many people who falsely give the answers asked to them. Hence, in this particular argument, as the survey was taken according to the people living in city L, it is very much obvious that, the residents will praise their own city. However the city might be, the residents of it will definitely not

give any bad comments. So, the people who have been surveyed might have lied in the survey about the quality of life they are living. Moreover, the features which have been mentioned in the argument such as good schools, friendly people, affordable houses, safe environment and flourishing arts always change from one point of time to another. Therefore, one should not depend on these features to identify the city in the state. This was another weak assumption in the argument. Without convincing answers to the question, one is left with the impression that the argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than a substantive evidence. In conclusion, the argument is seriously flawed to the above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could have been considerably strengthened, if the author had mentioned about current situation and examples of present life. Without much information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

3.

The argument concludes that the legislators are not concerned about the issue that violence in movies is causing an increase in the crime rates in the cities. The reason given for this conclusion is the failure to pass a bill that required censoring certain movies or limiting admission to people over 21 years of age which is believed to help in combating this problem. However, the argument has some questionable assumptions and flaws. First, the argument makes a sweeping assumption that all legislators are indifferent to the issue because they failed to pass a bill that called for some restrictions. The author does not provide any conclusive evidence supporting his claim that the bill failed to attain a majority vote because of the indifference of the legislators to the problem. Had the legislators been indifferent, they might not have proposed such a bill. Morever, there could be

several other reasons for majority of the legislators to disagree with the terms proposed in the bill. The intention of the bill may be good but the method could have been wrong. For example, when India denied to sign the Nuclear weapons treaty, it was only because they disagreed on a few terms of the treaty, not because they were not concerned about the controlling of use of nuclear weapons. Secondly, the author makes a generalized claim that establishing a censor board or limiting admission to adults will solve the problem of increasing crime rates. The author does not provide any statistics in support of this claim. There are several countries which have censor boards and age categorizations for movies, yet the crime rate has steadily increased over the years. For example, in India, crime rate has not decreased after the establishing of the censor board. Moreover, with the introduction of dvds and the internet, access to movies can no more be limited by limiting admission to movie theatres. These are several drawbacks of the actions proposed by the bill which the argument fails to address. Thirdly, the author fails to justify his claim that crime rates in cities are significantly affected by the violence depicted in the movies. This has long been a debatable issue, and the nature and content of such movies have to be taken into account before arriving at such generalized conclusions. The argument could have been strengthened if the author could provide evidence that violence in movies has a significant impact on the crime rates in cities. Also, the argument could have discussed the views of the legislators who voted against the bill to show whether they did so for valid reasons. To sum, the argument fails to convince that the legislators are not concerned about the issue of increasing crime rates because of violence in the movies. The author has made few generalized assumptions without providing sufficient evidence to support his claims. The argument could have been made stronger if the author

had provided statistics which show that censor boards and limited admissions are effective in reducing crime rates, and that the legislators did not have any strong reasons to oppose the bill.
As violence in movies increases, so do crime rates in our cities. To combat this problem we must establish a board to censor certain movies, or we must limit admission to persons over 21 years of age. Apparently our legislators are not concerned about this issue since a bill calling for such actions recently failed to receive a majority vote.

In this argument claims that crime rates increases in the cy because violence in movies increases. To strengthen this argument the author stats the solution that establish the problem to a censor board , or age limit to 21 years. Author also draw some fact that legislature are not concerned to this issue since bill has failed to receive majority vote. Argument suffer from several critical flaws. Though , author mention argument that there is analogous relation between violence in movie and crime rate in the city. If this argument true than it also plausible that violence in movies decrease , crimen rates in the cities also decreases. Author raises questionable assumption to this argument, For example, the movie , persuade of happiness , - this movie is about how middle class man struggle in his life to maintain relation in his family. Second, author stat the fact that legislature are not concerned about the issue and billcalling for action failed by majority vote. But , here author did clear out the whole picture that at which reason bill was not attract by legislature and failed. One has also plausible that this concern is affect to the audience or might get negative effect on this issue. Author dinot prove that crime rate was happened because of the violeces of movie. without giving any fact or event , it is hard to conclude any argument. In conclusion, the argument is seriously flawed toabove mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could have been considerable strengthened, if author had mentioned some reason or fact that support to conclusion. Without much information , the arguments remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.