The following appeared in an article in a health and fitness magazine. “Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda,

The argument claims that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals which are necessary for good health, as stated by the laboratory studies. In addition, the water is completely free of bacteria. The argument also states that the residents of Saluda, which is a small town, are hospitalized less than the national average. The author of the argument concludes that despite the fact that Saluda water is expensive, investing in it rather in taper water results in good health. The argument manipulates the facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument depends on no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.

Firstly, the argument states that the residents of Saluda, the small town, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. And due to this, investing in Saluda water is better than investing in tap water. This is an unsupported claim by the author as the argument demonstrates a co-relation between the residents of a small town with that of national average. There are many reasons as to why the small town residents are less hospitalized, therefore the comparison in invalid. One among the reasons is that as Saluda is a small town, its residents might not be financially healthy. As a result they could not afford the expense of the hospital. Another possible reason could be that there might not be sufficient clinics in the town. Furthermore, there might not be efficient registering of the hospitalized cases in Saluda.

Secondly, the argument states that Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive. Here, an important question is raised that how can the water be expensive. The water is natural which comes from the spring and hence should be available at nominal prices. There might be reasons behind the water being expensive. One could be the laboratory operations done with the water, which resulted in expensive price. As the author states that the water is free of bacteria. This could be due to experiments done in the water which made it free of bacteria. Without convincing answers to the questions, one is left with the impression that the claim Is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and therefore is unconvincing. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all the contributing factors. In this particular case, without much information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.