The following appeared as part of an article in the travel section of a newspaper:
“Over the past decade, the restaurant industry in the country of Spiessa has experienced unprecedented growth. This surge can be expected to continue in the coming years, fueled by recent social changes: personal incomes are rising, more leisure time is available, single-person households are more common, and people have a greater interest in gourmet food, as evidenced by a proliferation of publications on the subject.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument claims that the rise in the popularity of restaurants has been stimulated by the social changes that have occurred in the past ten years. The authors of the argument assert that the social changes have been significant and have resulted in the boom in the restaurant industry. While I agree with the fact that the social changes have occurred, I disagree with the assertion that they have resulted in the restaurant boom
First, the authors make the assumption that the rise in the restaurant industry has been closely linked to the social changes. However, the reader is left with the impression that the restaurant boom is a direct result of the social changes. The implication is that the rise in restaurant popularity is a direct result of the social changes. However, the restaurant industry has existed for many years, long before many of the social changes came into play. Moreover, the increase in restaurant popularity was gradual and did not begin until the most recent social changes came into play
The authors also assert that ‘more leisure time’ has increased the popularity of restaurants. However, leisure time is not defined; “more” has perhaps been used in place of greater. More leisure time for Americans does not necessarily mean that Americans now have greater leisure time. In fact, many people, including the working population, find that they have less time than ever to devote to leisure activities. In addition, free time in America is often spent on watching TV, playing video games, or surfing the Internet. Restaurants may indeed be competing for business against these activities, but it is not likely that these social activities have caused the restaurant boom
The authors also claim that ‘single-person households are more common.’ This is perhaps true, but this does not explain why more restaurants have opened. Perhaps the rise in the divorce rate has forced many people to stay at home to cook, instead of going out to eat. Perhaps families have shrunk, leading more people to dine out. Moreover, the divorce rate may not be an accurate indicator of household size. In the past, couples had children, and then had fewer children. However, today, many parents are choosing not to have children. Thus, the number of households is approximately the same as the number of children
This line of reasoning leads to the assumption that the restaurant boom is the result of social changes that have occurred in the past decade. However, there is no evidence that this is the case. In fact, it is highly likely that the rise in the restaurant industry has more to do with general economic factors than with the social factors cited by the authors. Furthermore, finding a true correlation between social changes and the restaurant industry is difficult because the data is scanty and contradictory. For example, the authors cite a publication that states that ‘more gourmet food’ has resulted in the restaurant boom. However, other publications claim that gourmet restaurants have closed, and that the rise in gourmet restaurants is merely a fad. The claim that the restaurant boom is a direct result of social changes is weak, and is not supported by evidence.