Team stand on sending Singaporeans teenagers to Boot camp

Inductive Argument
(2nd Paragraph)
P1 : Emotional control and the ability of consider consequences are not developed yet in a teenager who is between fourteen and nineteen of age.

P2 : We often hear of cases where teenagers engage in fights, staring incidents.

C  : Teenagers by and large tend to have a more rash, abrasive and impulsive nature.

Analysis

Premise 1 is true as it was is from a research published in 2004 at the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. On the other hand, Premise 2 does not provide specific figures (percentage) such as “hear of cases”. Therefore Premise 2 cannot support the conclusion that “‘Teenagers by and large tend to have a more rash, abrasive and impulsive nature”. In conclusion it is Uncogent and is a bad argument.

Deductive (3rd Paragraph)

P1 : Students who misbehave in South Korea are sent to a boot camp.

P2 : These misbehaving students are made to go through physical endurance trainings and strict regimented discipline.

P3 : Students who pass out from the boot camp end up well-behaved and aligned to their parents‟ wishes.

C   : Students who misbehave should be sent to a boot camp.

Analysis:

Flow make sense = Valid

Premises maybe false

Therefore, the argument is unsound

Inductive (4th paragraph)

P1 : A friend’s son recently picked up smoking because of peer pressure

P2 : Another friend's son has taken to spouting profanities when he talks to his parents due to peer pressure also.

P3 : He and his friends are teenagers.

C  : Teenagers are so susceptible to peer pressures.

Analysis:
Strength: 2 people out of teenages (weak)
therefore weak / uncogent argument

Team stand

We do not agree to send the people to boot camp

From 2nd and 4th paragraph, it is a uncogent argument, as majority of the argument is not true. Argument from 3rd paragraph is a weak argument as the argument is the context of South Korea.

It is concluded that we do not agree to send people to boot camp