Columnist: Conclusion The dangers of drinking are greatly exaggerated in the medical press. ██ ███ ██████ ███████ █████ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ███████ ███ ███████ █████ █████ ███ ██ ███████████ █████ ███████ ███ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ██ ██ ███
The columnist concludes that the medical press greatly exaggerates the dangers of drinking alcohol in its frequent reporting on how alcohol can shorten someone's life. How do we know that this is an exaggeration? Because the columnist's grandfather was a lifelong heavy drinker, and yet lived to the age of 95.
The columnist's argument attacks a general claim made by the medical press (that alcohol is dangerous) using a single contradictory example (the columnist's grandfather). However, it's entirely possible that the columnist's grandfather is an outlier; the general claim can still be true even if not every individual case follows that pattern. Using a single specific example to challenge a general claim is a weakness in the argument.
The reasoning in the columnist's ████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ████████
does not address █████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███████████
fails to consider ███████ █████ ████ ███████ ███████████ ████ ███ ███████ █████ ████
only addresses the ██████ ██ █ █████ ███ ███ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ████
confuses the cause ██ █ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ ██████████
relies merely on █████████ ████████ ██ █████████ █ ███████ █████