Argument 226

stanzyUID: 2629386

"Because the demand for our automobiles is expected to increase dramatically, we need to open a new manufacturing plant as soon as possible in order to continue to thrive. Our marketing projections indicate that 80 million people will want to buy our automobiles, yet our existing plant can only produce 40 million automobiles. The new plant can be opened on a part-time basis, with workers from our existing site rotating responsibilities, until an operational staff can be trained. A major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this part-time rotating strategy when it opened its new plant five years ago."
WORDS: 345          TIME: 00:20:29          DATE: 2009-9-6 16:45:30

The arguer suggested that they need to open a new manufacturing plant in order to continue to thrive. In order to support his or her suggestion, the arguer provided a marketing projections which indicate that 80 million people will want to buy their automobiles, yet their existing plants are not enough. To solve such problem, the arguer also suggested a possible method called part-time basis, which is quite successful applying to airelane manufacture. The evidence and the advise the arguer given have some merits, though they may seem to be groundless after a careful scrutinization.

Frist of all, the marketing projections is open to doubt. Such survey merely based on a presumptuous premise that the demand for their automobiles is expected to increase dramatically. It is possible that people only need such type of automobiles, yet they may prefer other brands. Even if the people who took the survey do need their products, they are merely potencial cosumers yet we are not sure when they'll buy those automobiles. So it might be too cursory to make the dicision to increase production.

On the second place, the arguer made a false analog between the automobile industry and airplane maufacture. The only similarity between the two industry is merely that they are both a kind of viecle. However, the arguer oversimplified the situation of the two industries. Since aireplane is an industry that requires workers with more experience, it's more likely that they'll find an operational staff that can be trained. The circumstances in automobile industry might be more complicated. Maybe the workers in their factory are not well trained or with such experience. Or even more possible, the workers will become unsatisfied because of the rotating responsibilities.

To better evaluate the argument, the arguer needs to do a more careful research about the market and a survey that what kind of automobiles people prefer  more . Before soing such a job, it would be too presumtuous for the arguer to say that the demand for their automobiles is expected to increase and to make any decisions.


太奇怪了，怎么一用AWP写作字数就明显少了呢？我之前都是用Word 练习的，因为不想看着纸是空白的，都拼命写一堆。
这篇我就找出来两个错误。一个是调查的前提有误。也许是有80million 个人想要买车，但不一定是他们的品牌。另一个是错误类比，就是把汽车行业和航空行业作比较，认为航空业的rotating strategy 也适用于他们。还有其他错误吗？