Many people have diverse views in the field of business. While some of them believe that it has a potential to rake in huge profits, others maintain that it is a risky endeavor. Consequently, they choose to get into employed jobs where they are assured of pay after work. Although the group might be right in its sense, the paper provides an argument bearing logical fallacies that the public holds about business.
Business requires people who are well-endowed with huge amounts of financial resources. The situation, therefore, makes the individuals able access supplies and capital required for operations (Ong, Normand, & Schenk, 2018). They are also able to employ highly skilled personnel who will offer high-quality services to the entities. People with enough financial resources are also able to use multiple marketing techniques to increase their sales. They are also able to widen their channels of distribution to cash into the opportunities present.
The main reason for many business failures is a start-up with little capital. A person may lack the ability to secure some of the necessary items that are necessary for business. He may also use part of the profits made to meet the capital requirements of the business. The firm may, therefore, struggle to the level where its perpetuity becomes jeopardized (Christoforides, Spanoudis, & Demetriou, 2016). Therefore, it is either a person wishing to get into business to source for enough finances or it will fail. He may need to rely on his savings or look for more sources, which could be loaned from financial institutions. The relationship between huge financial resources and success of a business is the same way as that of fuel and a case. Without fuel, a car cannot move. Therefore, without huge financial resources, a business entity that has just been established may not function properly.
Although it is factual that a business requires financial resources to operate, the capital needed is not necessarily high as the public opines. The belief that large amounts of financial resources are needed is an instance of begging the question. The public makes an opinion as if it is already proved (Sjoberg, 2017). The fallacy of begging the question is normally applied where people maintain a certain belief regarding the issue without having verifiable facts that would support it. They may, therefore, end up believing a concept that is not true and pass it around to other people. As a result, it may reach a point where the public may have a view that there is a strong connection between being financially endowed and the success of a business.
The public may correct the fallacy by collecting information from many businesses and assess the financial position that they were in at start-up. The process will, therefore, enable the public to identify some of the aspects that may be important in making the argument (Sergeyev, 2018). It may also be able to identify some inconsistencies in the beliefs that it holds about the success of a business entity with the number of financial resources that the proprietor might be having.
The public also makes a fallacy of false cause where it indicates that the lack of huge financial resources in business is the main reason behind its failure. The argument could be based on the assumption drawn from a single or few instances observed around. The assertions can, therefore, not be extrapolated to the entire world of business (Sjoberg, 2017). It is, therefore, not entirely true that all businesses fail because they lack large amounts of financial resources to ensure that the different activities involved go on as would be expected. The fallacy of false cause operates where an individual cites remote reasons in a bid to explain various situations.
One method that may apply to correct the fallacy is to the public looking deeply and gathering enough information about some of the factors that are normally behind the failure of a business (Sergeyev, 2018). Through the action, the public may determine that there is usually more reasons that lead to business failure other than being endowed with lesser financial resources. For instance, some of the reasons that may be tied to business failure could be targeting the wrong market, poor positioning of a business outlet and the general poor planning before the business start-up.
The public also appears to apply the either-or fallacy. The concept is normally applied where people have an assumption that there are only two sides on the issue. As a result, the public maintains that it is either a person has huge financial resources for a business or the entity will fail. The statement, therefore, negates various tenets and requirements that are deemed vital towards the success of a business entity (Ong et al., 2018). It only associates the success of a business with huge finances, not making mention of some other aspects that may be crucial towards its success. Some other requirements that may be pertinent to the success of a business are proper planning and gaining a more significant share of the market to increase the sales made.
To correct the "either-or" fallacy, the public may need to look into the operations of different business entities known to them. They need to identify some of the challenges that the businesses experienced and how they managed to get out of them (Sergeyev, 2018). The action will enable the public notice that some companies have managed to grow large in spite of having limited financial resources for a start. The information will, therefore, enable the public to understand that the resources required for a business start-up do not need to be quite immense.
The public also appears to make a false analogy where it brings up the car and fuel comparison concerning huge financial resources and the success of a business. It is evident that a car needs fuel to move (Ong et al., 2018). However, the finances required towards the success of a business do not need immense resources. There are many situations where businesses have began with little resources and grown into large companies with limited financial resources.
The public also needs to correct the false analogy logical fallacy on linking the car and fuel concept to the success of a business. The two concepts do not link. The public, therefore, needs to provide an analogy that bears an almost same semblance of the relationship between huge financial resources and the success of a business entity. Although the large amounts of financial resources may enable the business to operate better, they may also sustain it if they are limited. The public may, therefore, need to rely more on looking into the operations of other entities to determine the steps they take to achieve success in their operations.
...(download the rest of the essay above)