标题: [phoenix] Argument130 第二次作业 by 3号 [打印本页] 作者: ningbo1990 时间: 2010-2-12 19:48:01 标题: [phoenix] Argument130 第二次作业 by 3号
Argument 130:
The following appeared in the annual report of a chain of stores that sell supplies for do-it-yourself home improvements.
"Current reports indicate that sales of new homes nationwide declined by 9 percent during the past year, while sales of existing homes increased by 16 percent. Thus we can expect that the percentage of homeowners who will be making repairs or improvements to their homes will also increase. In addition, people who buy existing homes will have more money left over after the purchase to spend on home improvements. Finally, people who buy existing homes are more likely to make improvements themselves, as opposed to paying someone else. These factors combined indicate we can expect an increasing demand for products in all our stores nationwide, thus increasing our profits in the coming year."
The argument contains several facets that are questionable. First, the data information is completeness. In addition, the author built several non-causal relationships. Finally, the result is lack of sufficiency and necessity. I will discuss each of these facets in turn.
First, the author lists the percentage changes in new homes` sales and existing homes` sales seem logical since it makes a illusion that the existing homes is much more popular than new homes. When we consider this situation, however, the number of new homes buyers is much bigger than existing homes ones, the contrast with percentage is pale. Since the author do not support the actually population on sales of new homes and that of existing homes, we cannot conclude the existing homes became much more popular last year.
Supposing the sales of existing homes were much bigger than the new homes, the author builds a false relationship that people would increase the percentage of repairing or improving homes after buying existing homes. Perhaps it is the good quality of existing homes that makes people favor them, and these good quality homes need not to repair; or there is a possibility that the existing homes are well content the buyers so there need not improving at all.
Even if the home improvements and repairing engaged, there is more money left and consumed it to home improvements is unreliable. Maybe people are lack of money and they have to choose used homes, and maybe they want to spend money on other activities such as educating their children, buying cars, paying off debts, these makes them could not spend much on home improvements.
Even if they spend their extra money on home improving, the conclusion that they are likely to make improvements themselves not paying others is ridiculous. The author do not give a proper reason to illustrate or make a data to analysis, we can take many oppose examples to demonstrate the result. Maybe people do not want make improvements by themselves because do have to work or take care of their children, or they do not know how to improve houses, or the fee paying someone else is very cheap, all these factors can overthrow the conclusion the author illustrated.
Finally, assuming that these factors I overthrow above are right, the conclusion that the profits and the demand of all their stores around nationwide will increase cannot be supported. Because there is a possibility that the nation survey cannot present every cities` situation, and people may not choose their store when buying equipments, all their stores could improve demand is impossible; even if there has a possibility their stores could not profits in the coming years, maybe the cost of equipments is too high or maybe the rent of stores is expensive or maybe the competition between the same kind of stores is over exciting or maybe they could not profits in the coming years but the third years. All these assumptions will make these stores do not have profits in the next year.
There are also some other facets that the reports may not reliable and the trade the reports asserted may not continue in the next few years. In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. The argument could be improved by providing the actual number of the changes of new homes` sales and existing homes` sales, it should be given more concrete examples or reasons to illustrate the conclusion that why people would increase the percentage of repairing or improving homes, why people would use their extra money to improve homes and why people would pay others not themselves to improve homes. At last, the author should re-exam the conclusion in the end of the argument and gives a proper answer to it.