[a习作temp] （作文互改小组）argument 作文贴白宝 [复制链接]

白宝
UID: 2814764

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 73
寄托币: 215
注册时间: 2010-5-16
精华: 0
帖子: 39

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2012-12-11 23:27:01 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由白宝于 2012-12-11 23:45 编辑

第一次发作文，请各位猛拍砖。

相关帖子 Updated by 2025.03.30

0 0

白宝
UID: 2814764

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 73
寄托币: 215
注册时间: 2010-5-16
精华: 0
帖子: 39

沙发

发表于 2012-12-11 23:52:46 |只看该作者

2012.12.11
argument69
The writer is hoping we just focus on the noncontroversial statement about superficial phenomenon of choosing Zeta company for construction, and not notice what being assumed. In the memo, the vice president maintains that using Zeta Company for the new building project. Even though, this argument seems convincing at first glance, but the basis for its view based on a serious misinterpretation of the truth. My reason will be stated as follows/

Firstly, the vice president mentions that Zeta company saved half of the maintain charge of the floor in the building than Alpha company last year. Thus it, seemingly, shows Zeta is better than Alpha at constructing floor. Differences between this two buildings' construction are uncertain; there is the possibility construction costs of building belong to Zeta is higher than Alpha, while its difficulty degree is lower than Alpha's. On the other hand, one year's low costs do not mean, during the whole effective life of the building, maintenance costs is lower than building constructed by Alpha. Demonstration from this memo is definitely deficient, unless the vice president can testify this and other similar scenarios are improbable.

Secondly, vice president uses the comparison of energy consumption between the two buildings to develop this argument. From his point of view, energy consumption in Zeta's building is lower than Alpha's, and if we choose Zeta as the constructor of next building it will save money as well. Energy consumption of one building can not prove this building is energy-saving, hence it is also related to building's occupancy rate. Concerning that, there are plenty of tenants in Alpha’s building while no tenant in another one. Energy consumption, in this case, can not be one criterion of the quality that buildings being constructed. Vice president from this company needs do more investigates about details' of energy consumption before selecting the subcontract company.

Last but not the least, even though the evidence at last turns to be the supporting one of his forgoing assumptions, the vice president just merely believes lower price of employee turnover can the reason to choose Zeta. When consider which company we should choose, we might have taken numerous factors into account, especially comes to the construction company. Besides the construction quality, energy consumption of one building, construction period and so on, costs of a building's contraction is also significant. It includes construction company's employee turnover as well as construction costs. In a word, a overall consideration is needed before the vice president making a decision.

In a nutshell, argument from this memo about which company should be selected may not bases on effective evidence or convincing inference. Neither of these is nonsignificant to the integrated and logical ratiocination. Only reasoning more persuasively, citing evidence more conceivably, can this vice president make a wise decision for his company.