The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food distribution company with food storage warehouses in several cities."Recently, we signed a contract with the Fly-Away Pest Control Company to provide pest control services at our fast-food

A memorandum is sent by the Vice president of a food company regarding a change in Pest control companies and the increase in damages in a storage place. The vice president proposes to change back to Buzzoff Pest Control Company due to the fact that even though it is more expensive the damages were significantly smaller. However, there are evidence needed to support his argument and in the following paragraphs I found them and prioritized them from least to most significant.

The vice president in his memorandum is falling into a common fallacy regarding time. More specifically, he states that they recently signed off a contract with Fly-Away Pest control Company but fails to mention specifically how many months or weeks ago is recently. For instance, if his company signed off the contract merely 1-2 months ago maybe the pesticides from the new company would not have time to fight pests. In this case, the fault lies on pesticides used by the previous company and their lack of dealing successfully with pests. Thus, from the example above it is evident that the vice president should cite more information regarding the time of the contract. For example, he should provide the contract details, information about pesticides used by the previous company and lastly he should provide sufficient evidence about their efficiency in pest control.

In the memo sent by the vice president it is also mentioned the amount of 10.000 US Dollars as damage from insufficient pest control from Buzzoff Pest Control Company. This amount is only from the previous month and only from the store of Wintervale, what about the damage from previous months? Are there any evidence showing that indeed this amount is also the average of damage in the previous months? For example, if the vice president provided information showing that the damages from the previous months are all around 10.000 $ then this information can support the vice president's claim that indeed Buzzoff Pest Control Company is a more efficient company than the new and more cheap company.

Lastly, the most important fallacy the vice president falls in his way of supporting his claim is about the two different stores. He cites information regarding damages from two different stores but we do not know if the conditions in these stores are similar. For instance, if the store in Wintervale is situated at the Northern USA and if Palm-City is a city in the South then it is very likely the pest damage in Palm City to be much larger from Wintervale due to the more humid and warm climate in Palm City. Therefore, the vice president should provide information and cite evidence from surveys regarding the climate and weather conditions in both cities in order to determine whether the conditions in both cities are similar. In this case these evidence can support the claim of the vice president.

All in all, in this essay the most logical fallacies in which the vice president fell while trying to support his claim were mostly depicted through examples and the evidence needed to support the decision on changing back to Buzzoff Pest Control Company can be found on the paragraphs above.