Critical Thinking Skills - Developing Effective Analysis and Argument(2)

Answers to Practice 2: Finding flaws in the argument
alone put resources into environmental programmes. As
he suggests, why should developing countries modify
their behaviour whilst developed countries continue
with a wasteful lifestylelg Developing countries will
always want to follow in the footsteps of more developed
co~ntries.~ Developed countries are like parents who
smoke 60 cigarettes a day but get angry if their little
children then threaten to take up the habit themselve~.~~
19 Misrepresentation. The author
misrepresents Dr Mwandoysa's views.
Mwandoysa does support developing
countries playing their part in reducing
emissions but believes that developed
countries are better placed to support
research and development in this area
(see Practice 1).
3 It is stereotyping to suggest that all
developing countries aspire to be
identical to developed countries.
12 False analogy. On the surface of it, this
looks like a reasonable analogy, suggestive
of hypocritical behaviour in both cases.
However, it is a poor analogy because
parents have a very different relationship
with their children from that between
developed and developing countries.
Parents have a duty of care to protect
their children, who are dependants, from
the effects of their behaviour, whereas
developing countries are independent
entities who can make their own
decisions. Furthermore, the issue between
developed and developing countries
described above is one of comoetition for
a limited resource, which is not typically
the case when parents wish to prevent
children damaging their health.
The sense this gives of a hollow argument is increased
when one looks at the real reasons developed countries
are jumpy about the Protocol - reluctance to offend
major fossil fuel companies. Fossil fuels are big business
in many of the developed countries' economies and their
power is such that they can influence politicians against
ratifying the Protocol.' Some companies have even made
the ludicrous suggestion1' that global warming is
actually good for the planet!' l4
Industry associations in developed countries suggest that
agreeing to the Protocol would cost hundreds of
thousands of jobsz2 and there would, therefore, be a very
real impact on national economies. However, objections
go beyond these initial job losses. Not all developing
7 Assumption The author assumes that
fossil fuel companies have this power
but gives no evidence to support this.
17 Emotive language is used in the phrase
'this is a ludicrous suggestion'.
7 Assumption The author assumes that
global warming cannot be good for the
planet but gives no evidence to support
this position.
14 Complicity: the writing style here, and
the use of an exclamation mark, suggests
the author is making the audience feel
they must agree, or else they might be
considered 'ludicrous' too.
22 Poor referencing. The author doesn't
state which industry associations are
referred to here. A reference for a trade
association does appear in the references
section, but it is not clearly linked to this
statement.
O Stella CottreII (2005), Critical Tllinking Skills,
Palgrave Macmillan Ltd
Practice activities on longer texts 221