In surveys Mason City residents rank water sport (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational activities. For years there have been complaints about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to cleaning up Mason River. Use of the river for water sport is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational activities.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
While giving argument on why Manson city council should likely devote more budge to increase recreational activities in Mason River, the author argument does not make a cogent base, conceivably, this is stance strong with some rife, and thus, less stronger to lead funding.
Citing the rank of sport activities seems like claiming without any comparable variable. Author do not provide the base question on what activities are likely to choose from Manson's inhabitants related to this survey. So, the instrument's validity is questioned?. Analogically, a result of survey should show some optional and then make a rank based on the result getting from the subject. For example, there should be some pointing aspect, such as restaurant, sport facilities or just an artificial shunning view, that survey respondent favor on to build in their river. Unfortunately, this is not depicted in the author's argument.
Furthermore, survey population is also bemused. The author just said the conclusive without depicting any statistic proportion on how he/she can claim that is the representative result of the Manson city residents. Not surprisingly, a result should obviously share the proportion before state the conclusion. If far more 50% of respondent are favor on building sport facilities on Manson River, the claim on such survey can be reliable, on the contrary, claim with un-valid data like an antidote to the rigor of validity.
In conclusion, Manson city government may possibly invest on building of sporting facilities on Manson River as the ramification of survey. However, the depicting argument may bring un-satisfied base on whether it should implemented, the author claim is not likely persuade to allocate increased funding.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
While giving argument on why Manson city council should likely devote more budge to increase recreational activities in Mason River, the author argument does not make a cogent base, conceivably, this is stance strong with some rife, and thus, less stronger to lead funding.
Citing the rank of sport activities seems like claiming without any comparable variable. Author do not provide the base question on what activities are likely to choose from Manson's inhabitants related to this survey. So, the instrument's validity is questioned?. Analogically, a result of survey should show some optional and then make a rank based on the result getting from the subject. For example, there should be some pointing aspect, such as restaurant, sport facilities or just an artificial shunning view, that survey respondent favor on to build in their river. Unfortunately, this is not depicted in the author's argument.
Furthermore, survey population is also bemused. The author just said the conclusive without depicting any statistic proportion on how he/she can claim that is the representative result of the Manson city residents. Not surprisingly, a result should obviously share the proportion before state the conclusion. If far more 50% of respondent are favor on building sport facilities on Manson River, the claim on such survey can be reliable, on the contrary, claim with un-valid data like an antidote to the rigor of validity.
In conclusion, Manson city government may possibly invest on building of sporting facilities on Manson River as the ramification of survey. However, the depicting argument may bring un-satisfied base on whether it should implemented, the author claim is not likely persuade to allocate increased funding.
