The following appeared in a corporate planning memorandum for a company that develops amusement parks.
“Because travel from our country to foreign countries has increased dramatically in recent years, our next project should be a World Tour theme park with replicas of famous foreign buildings, rides that have international themes, and refreshment stands serving only foods from the country represented by the nearest ride. The best location would be near our capital city, which has large percentages of international residents and of children under the age of 16. Given the advantages of this site and the growing interest in foreign countries, the World Tour theme park should be as successful as our Space Travel theme park, where attendance has increased tenfold over the past decade.”
1. Increasing travel from the country the mentioned comany belongs to to foreign countries does not necessarily mean there is also a increasing interest in the amusment parks with a world tour theme.
2. Therefore, the proposal that the amusement park should be bulit in the capital city is also groundless.
3. Even if there is an increasing interest in the parks with a theme of world tour, it is not necessary to go to the extreme such us making the refreshment stands serve only foods from the country represented by the nearest ride.
4. What is more, the company's plan is based on a false analogy that the World tour theme park should be as successful as the Space travel theme park.
1. Increase in travelling abroad doesn't guarantee an increase in the interest to go the World Tour theme park.
2. Gratuitous assumption: No reliable evidence can support the idea that the capital city is the best location for an amusement park.
3. False analogy.