The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend."Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom

The homeowner asserts that Adams Realty (AR) is clearly better than Fitch Realthy (FR) this assertion is buttressed by several evidences which are connected with the conclusion by assumptions which should be carefully scrutinized in order to give a comprehensive estimation of the soundness of the friend's recommendation.

The first evidences which is given to us is that AR has more employees than FR. The originator of the argument surmises that number of the worker guarantee better service, this assumption is reasonable only in case all workers in both firms have the same level of expertise and experience, otherwise this author's belief is unwarranted. Perhaps estate agents of FR has a lot of more knowledge and expertise that make tham superior to their rivals. In other words, the assumption is not warranted and therefore it weakens the argument.

The second fact which is shared with us is that AR had bigger revenue than FR and the average home sale of AR was $168,000 when the average of FR was only $144,000. The statement assumes that situation of the previous year will be repeated in this one. However, we are not told any information which allows us to draw such an idea. Probably the real estate business in the town has a stiff competition with each other, and it is plausible that FR will dominate the field in this year. The argument might have been stronger had the writer given us more information about the dynamic and level of sales and revenue for ten previous years. However, even with such data, the probability exists that the situation in real estate business may change dramatically over a short period of time.

Finally, the argument uses unreasonable comparison of a situation which take place ten years ago and last year. The author believes that the situations were similar to each other but in fact, we have two homes which were located in different parts of the city, perhaps one of them is cheaper than other. Additionally to it, the economic situation last year may differ from one of ten years ago. For instance, the economy of the state might be in a deep stagnation ten years ago, the level of sales and consumption dropped drastically, in these circumstances the result of work of FR may display its high efficiency and professionalizm. Moreover, it is not conspicuous what result might have demonstrated AR in the same circumstances. In other words, the comparison of two situations which have nothing in common is unscrupulous. What is more, even if the two cases were similar to each other as well as all cirmustances, that is almost impossible, the extrapolation of one case on all situation is unreasonable. One case cannot and should not be used for drawing general conclusion.

In conclusion, the superiority of AR is questionable due to the fact that the homeowner does not manage to support his or her claim properly. The given data about average sales and revenue cannot support author's assumptions, moreover, the usage of one case to make a conclusion about the general situation is unreasonable as well.