The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.
“This past winter, 200 students from Waymarsh State College traveled to the state capitol building to protest against proposed cuts in funding for various state college programs. The other 1,200 Waymarsh students evidently weren’t so concerned about their education: they either stayed on campus or left for winter break. Since the group who did not protest is far more numerous, it is more representative of the state’s college students than are the protesters. Therefore the state legislature need not heed the appeals of the protesting students.”
The argument in the editorial section of the local newspaper is unconvincing because its conclusion depends on unsubstantiated assumption of comparing 200 protesting students with the 1,200 students either staying in the campus or going for a winter break. Each of the following areas merit further explanation before it can be given any degree of credibility of its conclusion of state legislature not heeding to the appeals of the protesting students on the proposed cuts in funding for various state college programs.
Firstly, it might be the possibility that 200 protesting students of Waymarsh State College are the representatives of the whole 1,200 Waymarsh students. They might have taken the responsibility of traveling to the capitol building to protest on behalf of the whole community of the students and showcase their concern in front of the state legislature.
Secondly, one cannot ignore the feasibility of the travel of 1,200 students at a single time. There might be various issues attached to it like there might be lack of funds for the college to afford for the travel of all the students.
Thirdly, staying on the campus or taking a winter break does not ensure that the students, who stayed on the campus or went for the winter break, are not concerned of the proposed tax cuts in funding for various state college programs. There might be a possibility that the 1,200 students might be showing their support to their fellow students protesting at the capitol building by some unique activity like wearing a black bad on the hand or so. Thus, further information might be required to put anything strongly in this regard.
Due to the many holes in the reasoning in the arguments of the report, it is difficult to take the arguments seriously. Unless further evidence surface in each of the areas discussed above, the given premises are insufficient proof that the conclusion drawn is viable.