The argument, “Since other employees are habitually late, we must conclude that Williams is habitually late”

is wrong in various ways. Firstly, the division has limited access to the time sheets. For that reason, it cannot argue with any certainty that all the employees are customarily late as the time sheets present are for a few of the workers. Secondly, Williams is just one employee and cannot be held responsible for the lateness of other workers. He can only be accountable for his actions. Thirdly, there could be a possibility that despite the repeated delays of some employees to get to work, Williams attends work early.

Accordingly, the conclusion that the employees are habitually late because Williams is usually late does not hold ground; hence, it can be regarded as a fallacy. To address the fallacy, the division must collet adequate data to support their argument. Itdivision needs a comprehensive report of the timesheets which include the log in and log out times of all workers in the organization. Moreover, the division should critically analyze a variety of factors affecting the firm and its employees to determine the cause of lateness in “some” of them. Once it has adequate information on which persons are customarily late for work, the division’s management can approach them to identify the root cause of the lateness, facilitating the development of a logical and accurate argument.

Indeed, the argument, “If you submit late consumer data reports, the company will go bankrupt.’ ‘Do not submit late reports.’ ‘Then the company will not go bankrupt”

is a fallacy due to some factors. Firstly, there is no connection between the delayed submission of consumer data reports and the bankruptcy of the company. Although the company is delivering client data late which may calumniate to a variety of issues, it is not enough reason for it to go bankrupt. Notably, some factors contribute to a company becoming bankrupt. Given that, the argument that the late submission of consumer data reports is the reason of bankruptcy is inaccurate. Secondly, if the firm is encountering issues that may result in bankruptcy dealing with the late delivery of data reports cannot hinder it from becoming bankrupt. Undoubtedly, the company does not know what factors would contribute to its bankruptcy; hence, it is assuming that the late submission of consumer data reports is the only factor that would result in bankruptcy.

Indeed, the above argument is false; hence, the company should address a couple of issues that may facilitate the development of an accurate argument. Firstly, the firm should undertake a critical analysis of its operations through a variety of tools, including SWOT and Pestle tools of analysis. These two tools will play a crucial role in the identification of factors that affect the performance of the organization. Once the firm has identified the factors that affect its performance, it would be in a better position to identify the major risks factors that can contribute to its bankruptcy. Once the organization is certain of the factors that can lead to its bankruptcy, it can develop an effective strategy as opposed to relying on false arguments.

Letter to the editor

The argument, “Our nation’s most financially successful people are readers—people who read literature daily”

is untrue as it is merely an assumption. There is no adequate evidence to support the argument. Reading is critical as it expands humans thinking for various reasons and on multiple occasions, people are encouraged to develop a culture of reading. For that reason, it is therefore not limited to novels or fictitious stories. Instead, reading involves a variety of subjects and various forms of literature, including financial reports, current affairs, and research articles among others. Consequently, the argument that people have to read fiction to be financially successful is inaccurate.

In addition, as much as it is true that financially successful individuals like to read, it is untrue to assume that they read on a daily basis. Furthermore, many economically stable people do not read literature, and instead, they seek information from various sources, including documentaries and news. In fact, most financially successful people seek information which is currently available in different aspects. They do not have to rely on literature to acquire information; hence, it invalidates the above argument as a mere assumption.

“If Amazon were to stop selling novels, then the novel would be dead.’ ‘But Amazon is still selling novels, so the novel is not dead.”

Notably, Amazon sells a variety of products all over the world, and it does not only sell novels. The company caters for a range of consumer needs both locally and internationally regardless of the percentage of people who request for these products. One can conclude that people from all over the world buy and read literature. However, there is no evidence to ascertain how many novels Amazon sells. For that, there is no valid proof to support the argument that selling books is a thriving business.

Furthermore, if Amazon fails to sell novels, it does not mean that people will not buy and read books as there are numerous stores online and all over the world that sell novels. For example, google books sells novels, and it does not have to stop selling them because Amazon is no longer selling books. Amazon is a single avenue for selling and buying books, and when one distributor of novels stop doing so, other companies will continue selling the product.

Moreover, Amazon or any other book outlet may stop selling books for a number of reasons not necessarily the death of novels. Amazon may decide to stop selling books either because they no longer want to trade in the business, stiff competition, low markup points, or a decline in supply or demand. Consequently, the assumption that if Amazon stops selling novels, then literature is dead is indeed false.

To develop a factual argument, it would be critical to undertake a complete analysis of the novels’ market both locally and internationally to determine the factors that affect this market. Furthermore, firms should understand why Amazon would stop selling books, what is its criteria for selecting goods for sale and what factors does it consider. The analysis will facilitate the development of a logically accurate argument as it will be based on evidence as opposed to an assumption. Of note is that the literature business is highly influenced by technology, especially in the 21^st century as people no longer have to purchase books. Instead, they can listen to an audio or watch a video which is a representation of a story written in a novel.