Cliff is assuming decreases in revenues are decreasing needed revenue for new projects. With a new product launch, the company would be able to regain market share and revenues. Pat is assuming a new product to identify customers by retinal scan, track information about customers, and deliver real time reports would give substantial ROI and provide revenues for the future, the product could be launched on the $400K budget with refined features, should be implemented by the August deadline without problem, a prototype product with incomplete features will still satisfy customers, Kelly is set in his ways and refuses to change, and Kelly is not being realistic about the capabilities of his existing employees.

Kelly is assuming the company is not equipped to do the product launch and still serve existing customers with the reduced staff, continually holding meetings is a waste of time because of arguments, can only create one feature and make it work by the deadline, and the product launch would take away from existing customers.

d. Chris assumes extreme action is needed due to the decrease in revenue and the new product launch is essential for the company's future.

2. Arguments

a. Cliff argues the company is experiencing a decline in revenues and market share and the new product launch would increase revenue and market share creating revenues for additional projects.

b. Pat argues the new product launch would increase revenue for the future and argues a substantial ROI on the proposed budget.

c. Kelly argues that company is not equipped to produce the product with existing short staff and claims they are only capable of creating one workable feature by the August deadline.

d. Chris argues that extreme action is needed to regain revenue and claims...

Argument Evaluation
Cliff's argument is sound because in order to build revenue the new

Product launch would create more revenue. Both premises are true and the conclusion follows the premises (In Logic, What Are Sound and Valid Arguments?). This is logical in nature because it is has true reasoning behind the argument (Kies). Pat's argument is unsound because there is no guarantee of success with the project. Her argument is emotional in nature because it has no reasoning and plays on the emotions of others. Kelly's argument is sound because the true conclusion follows the true premises. His argument is logical in nature because it contains reasoning. Chris's argument is sound because a true conclusion follows the true premises. It is logical in nature because it contains reasoning.

4. Fallacious Arguments

1. Pat: "… I don't see why we can't produce by August with it. From what I've seen, our programmers are the best!" is an appeal to emotions (Copi, 2009).

2. Pat: "When do you want to get together?" is an appeal to force.

3. Pat: "…why can't we put together some kind of prototype by August that includes all of the features? So what if they're not complete…" is a red herring fallacy.

4. Pat: "…come on Kelly, I talked to one of the programmers last week and explained what we're trying to do…" is an attack on the person.

Conclusions

There is…