Support In order to maintain a high standard of living, a nation must maintain a functioning infrastructure. βββββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββββββ βββββ ββββ βββββ ββββββ β ββββββ ββββ β βββββββββββββ ββββ ββ βββ ββββββββ ββ βββββββ βββββ β ββββββ βββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββ ββ βββ ββββ βββ ββ ββββββ βββββββ ββ ββ β ββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ βββββββ ββ βββββββββ βββ βββββββββββββββ
The author concludes that if a nationβs standard of living is on the rise, it must have invested heavily in improving its infrastructure. She supports this with two conditional premises:
(1) To maintain a high standard of living, a country needs to maintain a functioning infrastructure.
(2) Investing in infrastructure will raise the countryβs standard of living.
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of mistaking sufficiency for necessity. The author treats βinvestment in infrastructureβ as necessary for βrise in standard of living.β But according to premise 2 above, βinvestment in infrastructureβ is sufficient, not necessary.
In other words, the argument fails to take into account that a nationβs standard of living could improve for other reasons, without major investments in infrastructure.
Analysis by EleanorRoberts
The reasoning in the argument ββ ββββββ βββββββ βββ ββββββββ βββββ ββ ββββ ββββ βββββββ ββββ
a nation that βββββ ββ ββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββββ βββ βββββββββ βββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ
many nations are ββββββ ββ ββββ βββ ββββββ βββββββββββ ββ ββββββββββββββ
the rise in β ββββββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ ββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββββββ βββ ββββ β ββββ ββββ ββ βββββ
a rise in β ββββββββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ βββ ββ βββ ββββββ ββ βββββ βββββββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββββββ
nations often experience ββββββββββ ββββββ ββββ βββββββ ββββ βββββββββ ββ ββββββββ ββ ββββββββ βββββ ββββ βββ βββββββββββ βββ βββββββββββ ββ ββββββββββββββ