Self-study
The cafeteria at Acme Company can offer only four main dishes at lunchtime, and the same four choices have been offered for years. ████████ ████████ █████████ ███ ███████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ██ ███ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ███ █████ ██████ █████ ████ ██████ █████ ████████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ ████ █████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████████ ████████ █████████ ██████ ███████ ███ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ ██ █ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████
Phenomenon-Hypothesis
Although the argument is phrased as a recommendation, its underlying structure is standard phenomenon-hypothesis reasoning:
Phenomenon: The new dish performed better during its first two days.
________
Hypothesis: The new dish is better in ways that will persist permanently.(Conclusion: The new dish will please customers more in the long term.)
So we’re just anticipating alternative causes – reasons why the dish performed better in days 1 and 2 that won’t persist in the long term. Anticipating novelty in particular is pretty reasonable here.
Analysis by MichaelWright
1.
The argument is most vulnerable ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████████
a
the proportion of ████ ███████ █████████ ███ █████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ █████████
b
whether any of ███ ███████████ ████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██████ ███ ████████ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██████
c
a desire for ███████ ██ █ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████ █████████ ██████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ███████
d
what foods other ████ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ███████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ █████████
e
whether other meals ███████ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ███████ █████████