The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement."Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire, because it has spectacular natural beauty and a consistent climate. Another advantage is that housing costs

The author of the statement above enumerates several reasons why the Clearview town is a top choice for anyone who seeks retirement. A beautiful scene, a low cost of housing, and the promises of the mayor for making this town as a better place are among the reasons the author used to make its argument cogent. However, the lack of necessary evidence in the argument has rendered the argument untenable.

First, the author needs to provide evidence attesting that the climate is favorable in that town. An only consistent climate may not be promising. The weather can be consistently harsh cold weather. Especially as old people are more vulnerable to the cold, this even makes that place unfavorable for those who seek a place to retire.

Secondly, the author needs to provide clear evidence in terms of numbers that the housing costs are economic. The mere fact that housing costs are reduced from the previous years does not show that it is economical; may be, in previous years it was "exorbitantly high" and with a significant reduction now it is "only" high. Even assuming that the housing costs are lower, the author needs to provide financial evidence that the cost of living in Clear view is comprehensively affordable. There are other costs such as transport costs, the energy charges, and the price of consuming materials and so on. Each of these unaddressed factors can be expensive enough to overshadow the low cost of housing.

Thirdly, the author mentions that the mayor of the town promised many new programs for the citizens. The mayor might lie, or there are problems that he/she cannot meet his/her promises. An evidence is needed here to ensure us that such programs are certainly going to be fulfilled in Clearview. Therefore the current unsupported mayors' promises do not stand in good stead for the argument.

Finally, the author mentioned that number of physicians is far greater than the national average, and based on that an excellent health care would be provided for prospective individuals who want to be Clearview’s citizens. Here again the author needs evidence telling us in numbers that the ratio between the number of citizens and the physicians are in a balance. The mere being above the national average may not be enough. The national average might be one physicians per million people in each town, and here it is 10 physicians per million. Even if the quantity of the physicians is sufficient, the quality of them needs evidence to be proven. The expertise of the physicians is much more important than their numbers.

In short, as discussed, the lack of vital evidence makes the conditions in the argument equivocal. To make the argument clear the author needs to provide the enumerated evidence. With the current situation of the argument, the author’s conclusion cannot be tenable.