[a习作temp] argument170 【Goal to Reach Excellence小组】第19次作业 [复制链接]

Shanbing
UID: 2434746

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 356
注册时间: 2007-12-4
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2008-2-27 11:08:06 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

TOPIC: ARGUMENT170 - For the past five years, consumers in California have been willing to pay twice as much for oysters from the northeastern Atlantic Coast as for Gulf Coast oysters. This trend began shortly after harmful bacteria were found in a few raw Gulf Coast oysters. But scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. Once consumers are made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters, they are likely to be willing to pay as much for Gulf Coast as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for Gulf Coast oyster producers will follow.
WORDS: 391 TIME: 0:22:05 DATE: 2008-2-26

The author claims that people are likely to pay as much for Gulf Coast (GC) as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for GC oyster producers will follow. In order to support this argument, the author provides evidence that the scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. However, this argument is not well reasoned and has some logical flaws.

Firstly, the author fails to consider other possible reasons why people choose the northern Atlantic Coast oyster. Besides the safety of oyster, people perhaps like the flavor more than that of GC. It is possible that northeastern Atlantic Coast has more nutrition than GC. If above explanations are true, people might stick to this kind of oyster even if GC's safety is guaranteed.

Secondly, even the safety of GC oyster is devised by the scientists with a process. The author fails to provide the information that the process for killing bacteria will not do harm to the oyster itself and consumers. Perhaps the flavor and the nutritional ingredient are reduced due mainly to the possible chemical process. Perhaps the consumer cannot accept the GC oyster because they might be other bacteria existed in the GC. Without ruling out these alternative explanations, the safety of the oyster is not as convincing as the author claims.

Finally, even if the GC oyster is safe to eat, the profit for the GC must not be as good as Atlantic Coast oyster. On the one hand, the price for the Atlantic Coast will reduce when the oyster is enough on the market. It is hard for the GC to attain the previous price held by Atlantic Coast oyster. On the other hand, the consumer may not accept the GC oyster as soon as possible in spite of the awareness of safety of the oyster. It is common sense that it may take longer time to regain the consumers than to lose them. People may worry about the quality for some time. So it is over-optimistic for the author to draw the conclusion.

In sum, the author's conclusion that people are likely to pay as much for Gulf Coast (GC) as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for GC oyster producers will follow is not well reasoned. In order to make this argument better, the author should provide evidence that the real reasons of consumer’s choice, details on the devised process, and information about consumers’ reflection of the GC.

I will when I believe!