Argument 179
The following is a memorandum written by the director of personnel to the president of the Cedar Corporation.
“It would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year. It is the second most expensive caterer in the city. In addition, its prices have risen in each of the last three years, and it refuses to provide meals for people on special diets. Just last month three employees complained to me that they no longer eat in the cafeteria because they find the experience ‘unbearable’. Our company should instead hire Discount Foods. Discount is a family-owned local company and it offers a varied menu of fish and poultry. I recently tasted a sample lunch at one of the many companies that Discount serves and it was delicious-an indication that hiring Discount will lend to improved employee satisfaction.”

In this memo the director suggests that the company should hire Discount Foods (DF) rather than Good-Taste Company (GTC) to supply food in their employee cafeteria next year. To support this recommendation, the director points out that (1) the price of GTC food is the second highest in the city; (2) the GTC has increased its price in each of the last three years; (3) the GTC refuses to supply people on special diets with meals. In addition, the director mentions that DF provides a varied menu of fish and poultry, and a sample lunch which the director happened to taste, was delicious. At the first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but further consideration reveals that it contains several critical fallacies and therefore is unconvincing as it stands.

One problem with this argument is that the director unfairly claims that it would be a mistake to rehire the GTC because of its second highest price, its increases of the price in the last three years and its rejection of offering special diets. The director fails to consider the possibility that its second highest price might be due to its better foods and higher quality services in the industry. And the fact that the prices have kept increasing during last three years might result from the inflation or the rise of the cost in food industry. Admittedly, the fact that the GTC refuses to supply special diets does not necessarily indicate that the GTC cannot satisfy the employees’ needs unless the director provides the evidence that the most of the employees are not content with GTC because of the absence of special-diet service. In addition, the director does not explain why three employees complained last month. Maybe three people refused to eat in the cafeteria because of the worse atmosphere of the cafeteria which had nothing to do with GTC’s services; or perhaps the three people are on special diet. In brief, without ruling these and other possible factors, the director cannot confidently conclude that rehiring the GTC is a mistake.

Another problem is that the director’s conclusion that hiring DF will lend to improved employee satisfaction depends on the assumption that their employees favor fish and poultry. However, the director provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. The director must show that DF’s varied menu of fish and poultry is enjoyed by most of the employees. Otherwise, the director cannot convince me that hiring DF can improve employee satisfaction.

Even I concede that the employees like fish and poultry, which is, of course, an unwarranted assumption, it is nevertheless to unfair to infer that DF will meet the needs of the Cedar Corporation depending on a sample lunch. The sample is too small to be representative of all foods that DF supplies. The director overlooks the possibility that the sample lunch he happened to taste is an aberration and that most foods that DF serves taste badly. Unless the director tastes enough DF’s food to demonstrate that DF’s foods are really delicious I cannot accept the director’s conclusion.

To sum up, this argument is not well supported as it stands. To bolster this argument, the director should provide more information about GTC’s second highest price, the rise of prices and its lack of special-diet service. In addition, the director should provide the real reasons why three employees no longer eat in the cafeteria. To better assess the argument, the director needs to provide further evidence that DF has the ability to satisfy the employees.

着色的部分是我认为有逻辑错误的部分，请大家帮我好好的改改。谢谢！

[ 本帖最后由 lily1020 于 2008-10-16 00:19 编辑 ]

嗯，点击编辑，再弄一下颜色吧～～

PS，注意发帖格式，不要有空格，我帮你编辑了，下次注意。  谢谢配合～

Argument 179
The following is a memorandum written by the director of personnel to the president of the Cedar Corporation.
“It would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year. It is the second most expensive caterer in the city. In addition, its prices have risen in each of the last three years, and it refuses to provide meals for people on special diets. Just last month three employees complained to me that they no longer eat in the cafeteria because they find the experience ‘unbearable’. Our company should instead hire Discount Foods. Discount is a family-owned local company and it offers a varied menu of fish and poultry. I recently tasted a sample lunch at one of the many companies that Discount serves and it was delicious-an indication that hiring Discount will lend to improved employee satisfaction.”

In this memo the director suggests that the company should hire Discount Foods (DF) rather than Good-Taste Company (GTC) to supply food in their employee cafeteria next year. To support this recommendation, the director points out that (1) the price of GTC food is the second highest in the city; (2) the GTC has increased its price in each of the last three years; (3) the GTC refuses to supply people on special diets with meals. In addition, the director mentions that DF provides a varied menu of fish and poultry, and a sample lunch which the director happened to taste, was delicious. At the first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but further consideration reveals that it contains several critical fallacies and therefore is unconvincing as it stands. 其实这段让步不用了 这句话除了让ets的评委恶心并且知道这是模板句以外没有任何用处 ets不欣赏无谓的让步 你可以直接说 i will discuss all these mentioned above in turn 之类的就可以了 前面改写还不错 但是很费时间吧 不知道你有没有限时

One problem with this argument is that the director unfairly claims that it would be a mistake to rehire the GTC because of its second highest price, its increases of the price in the last three years and its rejection of offering special diets.这样连续并列长句 我不确定好不好  但是我读得不很舒服 The director fails to consider the possibility that its second highest price might be due to its better foods and higher quality services in the industry. And the fact that the prices have kept increasing during last three years might result from the inflation or the rise of the cost in food industry. Admittedly, the fact that the GTC refuses to supply special diets does not necessarily indicate that the GTC cannot satisfy the employees’ needs unless the director provides the evidence that the most of the employees are not content with GTC because of the absence of special-diet service.我不清楚为什么要把这么多flaws都挤在一起说 这导致你的例子空泛而且没有说服力 基本都是论证一步带过In addition, the director does not explain why three employees complained last month. Maybe three people refused to eat in the cafeteria because of the worse atmosphere of the cafeteria which had nothing to do with GTC’s services; or perhaps the three people are on special diet. In brief, without ruling these and other possible factors, the director cannot confidently conclude that rehiring the GTC is a mistake. 其实你这段已经不止one problem了

Another problem is that the director’s conclusion that hiring DF will lend to improved employee satisfaction depends on the assumption that their employees favor fish and poultry. However, the director provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. The director must show that DF’s varied menu of fish and poultry is enjoyed by most of the employees.这样的反驳太无力了只是一口咬定 没有实质 你应该举出具体的例子或者解释 也许 仅仅是老板喜欢fish and po,, Otherwise, the director cannot convince me that hiring DF can improve employee satisfaction.

Even I concede that the employees like fish and poultry, which is, of course, an unwarranted assumption,既然已经是让步了 这个话我觉得多余 it is nevertheless to unfair to infer that DF will meet the needs of the Cedar Corporation depending on a sample lunch.其实这个点完全可以和上面一段合并 The sample is too small to be representative of all foods that DF supplies. The director overlooks the possibility that the sample lunch he happened to taste is an aberration and that most foods that DF serves taste badly. Unless the director tastes enough DF’s food to demonstrate that DF’s foods are really delicious I cannot accept the director’s conclusion.

To sum up, this argument is not well supported as it stands. To bolster this argument, the director should provide more information about GTC’s second highest price, the rise of prices and its lack of special-diet service. In addition, the director should provide the real reasons why three employees no longer eat in the cafeteria. To better assess the argument, the director needs to provide further evidence that DF has the ability to satisfy the employees.

恩模板已经掌握很到位了
但是如果你无法提升自己举反例的能力 那么文章的深度就无法加深
要在例子的展开上多下功夫
文章的结构也不太合理 第一个论证段批驳了太多点 导致你后面无话可说了

很糟糕的一篇求回拍~ http://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-884310-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 StrayCrow 于 2008-10-16 14:48 编辑 ]

谢谢版主，下次注意

嗯，谢谢！

One problem with this argument is that the director unfairly claims that it would be a mistake to rehire the GTC because of its second highest price, its increases of the price in the last three years and its rejection of offering special diets. The director fails to consider the possibility that its second highest price might be due to its better foods and higher quality services in the industry. 多余的话太多

In addition, the director does not explain why three employees complained last month. 这个还好，但下面没有详细列出other reasons

Another problem is that the director’s conclusion that hiring DF will lend to improved employee satisfaction depends on the assumption that their employees favor fish and poultry. However, the director provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption.  又有不少多余的话。。。。

Even I concede that the employees like fish and poultry, which is, of course, an unwarranted assumption, it is nevertheless to unfair to infer that DF will meet the needs of the Cedar Corporation depending on a sample lunch. 看到最后，才舒了一口气，你终于把我最喜欢批地sample lunch 点出来了。为啥不开门见山阿？

帮你改好了 ~你看看吧

呵呵非常感谢！