The following editorial appeared in a newspaper in the country of Solaria.

“The Eliot Valley region was primarily agricultural twenty years ago. In the past twenty years, however, many computer-chip manufacturers have opened factories there. A recent study found that water pollution in the region was worse than in any other region in the country. Moreover, the computer-chip factories, which use large quantities of water to manufacture the chips, are probably responsible for the low levels of water in the region’s lakes and reservoirs. Therefore, if the region’s computer-chip makers had limits placed on the amount of water they could use, water quality would improve.”

The writer of the editorial says that in Eliot Valley, which was agricultural twenty years ago, many computer-chip manufacturers have established themselves. He is of the view that computer-chip factories use large levels of water and are responsible for low water levels in their water bodies. They should thus be restricted to use water so that water pollution can be checked. The argument however is not cogent if analyzed in detail. The following discussion proves the lack of logic and reasoning on the part of the writer in his argument.

The writer says that the water pollution in Eliot Valley was worse than in any other region in the country. However, he does not mention if the water pollution level is alarming or just minimal. Since he only gives a rough comparison with the water pollution of other regions of Solaria, it does not bring out the true picture of the level of pollution. It is likely that the water in other regions is very clean and thus there is very little pollution in Eliot Valley, which makes it worse than any other region. If only the writer had mentioned how grave the situation of water pollution was could the reader be convinced.

Further, the writer seems to ignore all the factors responsible for water pollution. Water pollution could be caused by its misuse by the residents. It is possible that the residents throw their wastes and wash clothes in the region’s lakes. Water pollution could also occur due to inadequate measures taken at the catchments areas of these water bodies. It would be unfair to hold the computer-chip factories completely responsible for the condition of water pollution in the area.

The writer mentions that it is these factories, which are probably responsible for low levels of water in the reservoirs and lakes since they use a large amount of water. The use of the word ‘probably’, however, creates a doubt in the minds of the readers. The low levels of water in the water bodies of the region could be due to other reasons as well. For example, the residents could be misusing water and in turn wasting a lot of fresh water. It is also possible that there have been very few rains in the region; that accounts for a low water level. Moreover, it is possible that due to very hot weather conditions, a lot of fresh water gets evaporated from lakes and reservoirs. The write does not probe into such possibilities and simply holds the factories responsible for the low levels of water.

The conclusion as given by the writer is questionable. According to him, if the factories had limits placed on the amount of water they could use, the quality of water would improve. He misses the point here that with limited use of water, only the quantity of water used would be affected. However, this could not ensure a better quality of water in the region. It is possible that the limited water they use is polluted more than before and the concentration of contamination has increased. Therefore, it would not make a difference in the quality of water in the region. The writer must understand that by putting limits on the use of water only the quantity being used could be affected and not the quality.

It is evident that the writer has not thoughtfully presented the argument. It is because of lack of reasoning and logic that the argument contains many loopholes. Therefore, the writer must revise his argument and amend all loopholes by referring to the discussion given above.