Argument15 真诚希望各位哥哥姐姐能指点一下

shinian1987UID: 2797009

In this analysis, the arguer concludes that the customers can not point out the difference between butter and margarine or they use the term ‘butter’ to refer to either butter or margarine. To support this conclusion, the arguer points out that only about 2 percent of customers have complained the change that butter was replaced with margarine. Moreover, servers’ report shows that many customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine. However, the argument is untenable unless all the possible explanations other than the proposed one can be conclusively excluded.

In the first place, the arguer’s explanation for the fact that only 2 percent of customers have complained about the change is that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with it. However, this is not necessarily the case. It is entirely possible that many customers dissatisfied with the change prefer to be silent or to express their discontent by simply not returning to the restaurant, not to complain. Either scenario, if ture, could lead to the same statistic concluded in the argument. Moreover, the greater the percentage of such customers, the weaker the argument’s evidence as an indication of customer satisfaction with the change.

In the second place, the mere fact that only about 2 percent of customers have complained about the change, because the arguer fails to inform us of the quantity of customers who is surveid. There is a strong likelihood that the number of interviewee is just one hundred, to Happy Pancake House in the southwestern United States, not enough absolutely. No evidence provided to prove that surveid customers are representative of all the costomers in the southwestern. In this case, the arguer cannot jusitify his/her claim that most people are happy with the change.

Finally, the arguer assumes that customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine means that they either do not distinguish butter and margarine or use the term ‘butter’ to refer butter or margarine. However, this might not be the case, for there are a host of alternative explanations. Perhaps many costomers choose not to ask waiter to rework a butter cake but to reluctantly accept a margarine one. Some costomers might also have no time to ask for a butter cake. Without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer’s conclusion remains dubious.

In conclusion, the argument cannot be taken seriously as it stands. To better evaluate the argument, the arguer would have to rule out all of the above-mentioned alternative explanations.



这篇文章写得很好啊，你有什么疑问么？
思路很清楚，表达也很不错。单词拼写稍加注意就可以了。

shinian1987UID: 2797009

In this analysis, the arguer concludes that the customers can not point out the difference between butter and margarine or they use the term ‘butter’ to refer to either butter or margarine. To support this conclusion, the arguer points out that only about 2 percent of customers have complained the change that butter was replaced with margarine. Moreover, servers’ report shows that many customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine. However, the argument is untenable unless all the possible explanations other than the proposed one can be conclusively excluded.

In the first place, the arguer’s explanation for the fact that only 2 percent of customers have complained about the change is that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with it. However, this is not necessarily the case. It is entirely possible that many customers dissatisfied with the change prefer to be silent or to express their discontent by simply not returning to the restaurant, not to complain. Either scenario, if ture, could lead to the same statistic concluded in the argument. Moreover, the greater the percentage of such customers, the weaker the argument’s evidence as an indication of customer satisfaction with the change.

In the second place, the mere fact that only about 2 percent of customers have complained about the change, because the arguer fails to inform us of the quantity of customers who is surveid. There is a strong likelihood that the number of interviewee is just one hundred, to Happy Pancake House in the southwestern United States, not enough absolutely. No evidence provided to prove that surveid customers are representative of all the costomers in the southwestern. In this case, the arguer cannot jusitify his/her claim that most people are happy with the change.

Finally, the arguer assumes that customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine means that they either do not distinguish butter and margarine or use the term ‘butter’ to refer butter or margarine. However, this might not be the case, for there are a host of alternative explanations. Perhaps many costomers choose not to ask waiter to rework a butter cake but to reluctantly accept a margarine one. Some costomers might also have no time to ask for a butter cake. Without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer’s conclusion remains dubious.

In conclusion, the argument cannot be taken seriously as it stands. To better evaluate the argument, the arguer would have to rule out all of the above-mentioned alternative explanations.

shinian1987UID: 2797009

不好意思，标出的拼写错误显示不了，你自己用word查一下吧。