标题: ARGUMENT179【0906G背水一战三月小组】第10次作业 By fireofnight [打印本页] 作者: fireofnight 时间: 2009-3-20 10:18:39 标题: ARGUMENT179【0906G背水一战三月小组】第10次作业 By fireofnight
The author points out that CC should quithiring GT for supplying food for their employees by choosing Discount instead,which is based on the reasons that GT is second most expensive caterer in thecity and the prices was rising , as well as refuses to provide special diet andhearing complains about the food from employees. Also, the author assertsDiscount is better by his personal experience. By deeply investigating, theargument contains several logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.
A threshold problem with this argumentinvolves the author's statement that choosing GT is not economical by reasoningthat GT is the second most expensive caterer in the city and the prices of itkept increasing during the last 3 years. The author fails to provide detailsabout prices information on other caterers in the city. It is entirely possiblethat there are only 2 caterers in the city and the second expensive one shouldbe the cheapest one. Or even, without knowing the prices situation of Discount,it is reasonable to believe Discount is the one costing the most if it isreally serve in good quality as the author asserts. On the other hand, althoughthe price was increasing in the last 3 years, the cost for choosing GT mightstill in a reasonable range and lower than most other caterers includingDiscount.
Moreover, the author assumes unfairly thatnot providing special diet and complains from employees indicate GT is servingwith a relatively low quality. It is possible that there is few people reallyneed the special diet in the company so that it would worth no efforts for any caterersto provide special meal for them. In addition, without giving details on whatthose employees were complaining about, it is not convincing that GT is servingin bad attitude.
Finally, stating Discount is a betterchoice base on the author's personal experience is unjustifiable, whichoverlooks a myriad of other possible explanations. Only tasting a sample lunchby the president at one of the many companies served by Discount is not ageneral enough test case for indicating the food in Discount is better than GT.It is entirely possible that the sample meal is specially prepared for thepresident for advertising, or the meals from Discount are not favored by theemployees in CC although other companies like it. Without ruling out thesepossibilities, the author could not convince me that we should choose Discountinstead of GT for supplying meals for CC employees
In sum, the author's argument isunpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen it, we need more details about pricesin other caterers in the city as well as some general feedback from theemployees about GT's service. In addition, more information would be needed forDiscount's service other than the president's personal experience.作者: yang1989 时间: 2009-3-21 12:54:20
The author points out that CC should quit hiring GT for supplying foodfor their employees by choosing Discount instead,which is based on thereasons that GT is second most expensive caterer in thecity and theprices was rising , as well as (GT) refuses to provide special dietand (CC) hearing complains about the food from employees. Also, the authorassertsDiscount is better by his personal experience. By deeplyinvestigating, theargument contains several logical flaws, which renderit unconvincing.
//长句并列的时候注意一下就好，比较容易犯迷糊。
A threshold problem with this argumentinvolves the author's statementthat choosing GT is not economical by reasoningthat GT is the secondmost expensive caterer in the city and the prices of itkept increasingduring the last 3 years. The author fails to provide detailsaboutprices information on other caterers in the city. It is entirelypossiblethat there are only 2 caterers in the city and the secondexpensive one shouldbe the cheapest one. Or even, without knowing theprices situation of Discount,it is reasonable to believe Discount isthe one costing the most if it isreally serve in good quality as theauthor asserts. On the other hand, althoughthe price was increasing inthe last 3 years, the cost for choosing GT mightstill in a reasonablerange and lower than most other caterers includingDiscount.
//很好。
Moreover, the author assumes unfairly thatnot providing special dietand complains from employees indicate GT is servingwith a relativelylow quality. It is possible that there is few people reallyneed thespecial diet in the company so that it would worth no efforts for anycaterersto provide special meal for them. In addition, without givingdetails on whatthose employees were complaining about, it is notconvincing that GT is servingin bad attitude.
//嗯，不错。
Finally, stating Discount is a betterchoice base on the author'spersonal experience is unjustifiable, whichoverlooks a myriad of otherpossible explanations. Only tasting a sample lunchby the president atone of the many companies served by Discount is not ageneral enoughtest case for indicating the food in Discount is better than GT.It isentirely possible that the sample meal is specially prepared forthepresident for advertising, or the meals from Discount are notfavored by theemployees in CC although other companies like it. Withoutruling out thesepossibilities, the author could not convince me that weshould choose Discountinstead of GT for supplying meals for CC employees
//great.
In sum, the author's argument isunpersuasive as it stands. Tostrengthen it, we need more details about pricesin other caterers inthe city as well as some general feedback from theemployees about GT'sservice. In addition, more information would be needed forDiscount'sservice other than the president's personal experience.