Posted by wgm on August 14, 19102 at 11:14:04:
14. The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper
from a citizen of the state of Impecunia!:
" Two years ago our neighboring state, Lucria, began a state lottery
to sopplement tax revenues for education and public health. Today, Lucria spends more per pupil than we do,and Lucria's public health program treats far more people than our state's program. If we were to establish a state lottery, like the one in Lucria, the profits could be used to improve our educational system and public health program. The new lottery would
doubtless be successful because a survey conducted in our capital city
concludes that citizen of Impecunia already spend an average of $50 per
person per year on gambling"
In this augument, the arguer advocates that the state of Impecumia should establish a state lottery like the one that has been proved successfully in its neighboring state of Lucria, thus the ptofits of lottery could be used to improve the state¡¯s educational system and public healthy program. This recommendation is based on the observation that that the lottery in Lucria bagan two years ago now can supplement tax revenues for education and public health program. For example, today Luctia spends more per pupil than Impecumia dose, and its public health program treats more people than Impecaumia too. Meanwhile the arguer assumes that new lottery would doubtless be successful because for a survey conducted in the capital of Impeaumia concludes that the citizens of Impeaumia already spend about $50 per person per year on gambling. As far as I am concerned, this argument is problematic for several reasons below.
First, this argument is based on a false analogy. The arguer simply equates Lacria with Impeaumia , this, however is unwarranted. As we know, the development level of economy, population, tax revenues and so on may be great different between two states. Maybe the development level of economy of Lacria is more advanced than that of Impeaumia, while its population is much lower than Impeaumia¡¯s. Maybe the tax revenues in Lacria are much larger than that in Impeaumia. So the government of Lacria can spend more money on educational system and public heath program. Moreover, the hobbies may be great difference between two states. For instance , people in Lacria like lottery very much, while people in Impeaumia like gambling instead of lottery.
Second, the arguer commits a fallacy of hasty generalization. We are informed that the new lottery would undoubtedly succeed because a survey draws a conclusion that people in Impeaumia already spend about $50 per person per year. However, this is unwarranted assumption. People like gambling do not follow that they also like lottery. For example, one of my friends who likes gambling very much but never spends money on lottery, even litter.
To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis dose not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence that the two states are similar in every aspect. To better evaluated the argument, we would have to be informed that people who live in Impeaumia like gambling that also like lottery.