[a习作temp] Argument176 有拍必回 [复制链接]

hoosooyoo
UID??186562

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 263
注册时间: 2004-11-19
精华: 0
帖子: 2

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-8-5 21:36:44 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Argument176 有拍必回！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户共用时间：28分55秒 346 words
从2005年7月5日20时55分到2005年7月5日21时28分
------题目------
The following is a memorandum from the sales director to the president of the Healthy-and-Good food company.
'A recent study indicates that Venadial, a new margarine currently produced only in the country of Alta, actually reduces cholesterol levels. Derived from the resin of pine trees, Venadial works by activating a metabolic response that is not yet well understood. However, cholesterol levels fell ten to fifteen percent among participants in the study who consumed Venadial daily, and the risk of heart attack by one-third. In addition, the new margarine is so popular that stores in Alta are unable to keep it on their shelves. Therefore, if our company obtains the exclusive right to sell Venadial internationally, our profits are sure to increase substantially within a very short time.'
------正文------
The memorandum suggests that Health-and-Good company should obtains the exclusive right to sell Venadial (V) internationally-which ensures a immediate profit increase. The argument based its conclusion on the following reasons: (1) V reduces cholesterol levels and risk of heart attack; (2) V are popular in Alta. However, close scrutiny of the above reasons lends incredibility to the argument. The sales director based his suggestion on several assumptions which made the argument unsubstantiated and unconvincing.

First, as to V's medical merits, the argument cited "a recent study" to prove it. Assume that V reduces cholesterol levels and risk of heart attack is credible. However, the study dose not provide any information about the paticipants' response to V. Absent such evindence, it is possible that V could have side effects which will neutralize its benefits. In this case, the sales director's claim will amount to poor advice to the company.

Second, even assume that V's medical merits are validified by the study, and the director's claim that V is popular in Alta is convincing. However, whether the company can gain exclusive right to produce V is uncertain. The director did not inform us whether there was another method that could produce V. Lacking such information, it is just as likely V can be compounded. Without ruling out this possibility, the director's claim will be unsubstantial and unconvincing.

Thirdly, the director based his conclusion further on the assumption that V would gain popularity internationally. However, this conclusion lacks credibility. Without investigation on the world market, it is possible that V's medical effect is not the best among homegeneities, or, V's effect is chronic which can not meet people's demand. If these are the cases, then the director's claim amounts to unsubstantiated expectation.

In final analysis, the director base its conclusion on several assumptions which lends incredibility to the argument. To better evaluate the argument, the director should provide us the following information: (1) report of V's all effects on human body; (2) report on V's producing methods; (3) investigation on the international market; (4) V's medical effects compared to other medicine