新g Argu 60 求拍~

ykhjyUID: 3013326

60) The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice for a client.

Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last heating season that region experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures, and climate forecasters predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes are being built in the region in response to recent population growth. Because of these trends, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil.

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

In this letter, the writer recommends to invest in Consolidated Industries for retailing home heating oil based on the assumption that home heating oil would be needy since most homes in the northeastern United States where are typically cold and the weather pattern would continue for several more years based on the climate forecasters, have used oil as their major fuel for heating. Furthermore, the writer seems to assume that many new homes' being built in that region means the market would be larger. Though it seems reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived and reasons are as follows.

In the first place, the writer seems to assume that even last heating season the region experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures, so oil as their major fuel for heating would be demanding, thus investing in Consolidated Industries would be wise. However, there's no information about the weather situation of recent years. It is possible that the region experienced 120 days with below-normal temperatures before last season, thus last season would be a really heating season that the demand for oil would be lower than fore years. And if the weather pattern which would continue for several years would be less and less cold, the future demand for oil would be lower and lower. Therefore it is unnecessarily reasonable to say that based on the weather pattern the fuel of oil would be necessarily demanding, thus investing in Consolidated Industries would not be necessarily wise.

In the second place, the writer seems to assume that many new homes' being built in the region shows the population there would grow thus more people need oil for heating and the investment advice is reasonable. However, many homes' built there doesn't mean that people would necessarily move into these homes. It is possible that the rent of these houses is so expensive that people cannot afford it, and maybe there always have traffic jams... All these may stop people living in these homes, thus even the weather would be colder and colder, the demand for home heating oil would be unnecessarily higher, and therefore the investment advice may be unwise.   

Finally, the writer seems to assume that based on the trends of home heating oil's increasingly demanded and larger market, investing in Consolidated Industries to retail home heating oil would be profitable. However, even if the trends are likely to become the truth, it is unnecessary to be profitable to invest in Consolidated Industries. Since it is possible that most communities there would demand for this home heating oil by contracting with some large companies, and Consolidated Industries one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil may cannot compete with those large companies, thus investing in Consolidated Industries may be not profitable.

In conclusion, the ill-conceived assumptions that demanding for home heating oil would be higher and higher and the home heating oil's market would be larger and larger lead the writer's recommendation to invest in Consolidated Industries to an unconvincingly reasonable one.

gypsy.shenUID: 3238723

这是我的第一篇arg，50分钟写了358....今天重新整理了下思路，贴上来交流下~~~~~~~~

这篇argument缺少数据，并且逻辑不清晰，不能提出令人信服的理由去得到最后的推论。

列举的事实。本文只列出了传统的取暖方式，而这一事实并不能支持作者的观点。要支持作者的观点就必须列出在这一区域现在大多数居民的取暖方式，但是这些信息并未给出。作者默认现在大多数居民采用的就是传统的取暖方式，但这并不能令人信服。如今在很多地方，普遍的供暖方式都是电子设备，在这一区域也很有可能大多数居民已经不采用传统的供暖方式。因此，作者给出的信息不足，要支持作者的观点，就必须列出现在居民采用的取暖方式。

天气预报。天气预报只预测了一个大概的趋势，作者并未列出天气预报做出此预报的可能导致因素。作者给出近几年来此地区人口增长，并建设了很多房子以缓解这一现象，人口有时候也是天气预报的一个考虑因素。如果影响此地区气温的因素里人口起重要或决定性作用，天气预报现在的预测是根据现在的人口，但是如果一两年以后人口的增长已经可以很大程度地影响气温，那么对供暖设备的需要可能不会增长。因此，把天气预报的预测作为未来几年气温的唯一衡量依据未免太武断（arbitrary），还需要了解导致这个地区未来气温的其他因素，才能确定未来几年的气温是否会下降。

根据以上趋势，作者给出推论（implication）未来的气温一定会下降，并且新到的居民一定会使用传统的供暖方式，所以油的使用会增加。如果未来的气温不下降，那么油的使用不一定增加。如果气温下降了，但是新到的居民选择的是其他供暖方式，而原来的居民是否会使用传统的供暖方式未知，所以不能推出此地区对这种油的使用会增加。

必须要确保未来的气温会下降并且这个区域大多数居民使用传统的取暖方式，才能得出作者的推论。但是作者并未给出足够的信息来支撑，所以，对于这种油的需要是否增加不能确定。

英文的明天再写~~~~