argument 209 你来拍我 我一定还击 为自己叫个好吧 two days left~~

buguolaoUID: 2570508

TOPIC: ARGUMENT209 - The following recommendation was made by the Human Resources Manager to the board of directors of the Fancy Toy Company.

"In the last three quarters of this year, under the leadership of our president, Pat Salvo, our profits have fallen considerably. Thus, we should ask for her resignation in return for a generous severance package. In Pat's place, we should appoint Rosa Winnings. Rosa is currently president of Starlight Jewelry, a company whose profits have increased dramatically over the past several years. Although we will have to pay Rosa twice the salary that Pat has been receiving, it will be well worth it because we can soon expect our profits to increase considerably."
WORDS: 592
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/3/15 14:59:26

Giving some postulations and facts, the author concludes that for returning the degenerative profits trend, Pat Salvo should be superseded by Starlight Jewelry as the president of Fancy Toy Company. The argument seems logically sound at the first blush, further pondering and close scrutiny reveal, however, that it is fraught with ungrounded, unwarranted and unsubstantiated claims.

As a threshold matter, the author positively establishes a causal relationship between the leadership of Pat Salvo and the fallen profits in Fancy Toy Company. However, the correlation between these two events, in itself, amounts to scant evidence that Pat Salvo should take the full responsibility for the losses of the company. Actually, host of other possible factors, including the unfavorable economic conditions, the turbulent market, or the delinquencies of the other colleagues in that company, might just as likely be the cause of the fallen profits. Without ruling out scenarios such as these, the author can not arbitrarily establish a cause-and-effect relationship between these two events.

Even it is Pat's faults that make those losses possible; the author unfairly concludes that the company should offer her a generous severance package. No corroborative reasons have been offered that Pat deserves this generous reward. Also, before taking any action, there are some side-effects of it that should be taken serious considerations to. It is entirely possible that all the other employees would be annoyed by this severance package--they might think it is unfair to them. Having failed to address this possible side-effect, the author can not justifiable conclude that Pat should be offered a generous severance package.

On the third place, by relying on the promising profits in Rosa Company the author optimistically admit the capability and competence of Starlight. However, the booms in the Rosa in the past several years might amount to an aberration. It is also highly possible it is the favorable economic conditions, and the surging demand of Rosa's foods, and other beneficial government's policies that had made these profits possible. Furthermore, we are not sure whether or not Starlight would be willing to defect to Fancy Toy Company. If Starlight would not, then any conclusions about the employment of Starlight would be meaningless.

Last but not least, the author prematurely assumes that by hiring Starlight, the degenerative trend of the company would be saved. However, even if Starlight has brought about tremendous success in Rosa, the author still fails to take into account of the possible dissimilarities between Rosa and Fancy Toy Company that might help to bring about a different result for Fancy Toy Company. Common sense and empirical evidence inform us that the conditions in the two companies might not be similar enough to substantiate this analogical deduction. Lacking the suitable experience of managing companies such as Fancy Toy, it is entirely possible Starlight would force this company into the unprecedented tribulation, make the conditions even worse. Still, profits is the products of cost, expense and selling, the author fails to overlooks the possible unfavorable aspects of those factors, thus make this argument invalid.

To put all the things in a nutshell, the conclusion reached in the argument is invalid and misleading. I would suspend my judgment to the credibility about the author's conclusion until the author can provide concrete information that it is Pat who brought about the company into the dilemma; and it is Starlight who brought about the prosperities to Rosa. It would also be useful to know that Starlight would be willing to work for Fancy Toy and the profits can increase considerably after the employment.