While watching the Olympics this summer, many people (including myself) were shocked at how young the Chinese gymnasts looked. "There's no way those girls are sixteen!" I would hear people comment. An Article in the NY times addresses both sides' arguments about whether or not the gymasts are sixteen. While reading this article, I noticed that some points of either sides' arguments were either strong or weak in logic (logos).
photo: He Kexin in the middle with a gold medal for uneven bars
Bela Karolyi, a coach to both US and Romanian countries argued that the gymnasts are not sixteen. He pointed out that it was easy for the government "of an authoritarian country to alter paperwork," and say that the girls are 16 on their passports. He also used the fact that the girls still have their baby teeth as evidence. I think this is very logical, because people lose most of their baby teeth when they are 16. He also points out that the passports could have been changed, and the passports were the only evidence provided in support that the girls were sixteen. However, Steve Penny, President of the USA gymnastics did not have a logical argument. He pointed out that in email messages and internet chat rooms, gymnast He Kexin was said to be 14. Chat rooms, email messages, and Wikipedia (also mentioned in this argument) are not valid sources, and therefore make the argument seem illogical.
The Chinese officials responded to this argument by providing the New York Times with copies of the passports that say the girls are 16. This is logical evidence, because a passport is an official document. However, the online records and 2007 National registration lists say that He is 14. This is also logical evidence, because the registration for the gymnasts must be correct in order for them to compete.
This argument is a proposal argument, and begs the question "What actions should be taken?" (see pg 27 of Everything is An Argument). I think that the argument plays an emotional concern to many other countries teams. By having younger gymnasts, the Chinese team has an advantage because the younger gymnasts can perform tricks easier and are psychologically less worried. Therefore, I think the argument should be investigated more on both sides, and I would suggest that the arguers strengthen their logical evidence. Right now, there are not enough correct facts to determine one side as the truth.
1 comment:
When I watched the summer Olympics this year, I specifically remember the emotions I felt when Nastia Liukin lost the Gold Medal in a tie breaker that He Kexin won. I remember looking at He Kexin’s petite 4 ft 8 in frame thinking that there is no way she is 16. Now, looking back at my biased perspective, I realize that this was an Americans’ point of view, and that in order to make an assumption about such a widely debated issue, the Chinese thoughts must be taken into perspective. This is similar to how Columbus’ perspective overshadowed the Indians when he took America over. In America, the popular belief is probably that the gymnasts are under 16, because we want our gymnasts to succeed, and our country to get more medals than the biggest competition, China. But now taking a deeper look into this controversy, I think that people in China have a completely different view on the subject. They most likely think that a passport is enough proof of age, and that the look of a person is not nearly enough evidence to make a claim that China is cheating. Despite the fact that I want the U.S. gymnasts to succeed, I agree with your claim that states that there is not enough logical evidence to say that she is not 16. I found something interesting regarding the Olympics and different perspectives. The United States website (http://www.nbcolympics.com/) lists the USA as first because we won the overall medal completion, while China’s website (http://en.beijing2008.cn/) lists China in first because they won the overall gold. This brings up an interesting difference in the perspective of countries.
Post a Comment