Argument32 (No.2) welcome to evaluate my argument.

jxkingUID：141801

Argument
32.The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the  
president of Acme Publishing Company.
"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take  
the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One  
graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only  
two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice  
president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can  
read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover,  
Easy Read costs only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when you  
consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar  
in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter.  
Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to  
take the Easy Read course."

In this analysis, the arguer recommends that Acme Publishing Company should send all their employees to take the Easy Read course. To support this argument, the arguer points out the faster one can read, the more information one can absorb in a single workday by citing two successful precedents in other companies. In addition, the arguer also assume the payment of the course which is a small price  would eventually benefit the Acme. At first glance, the arguer's argument appears to be somewhat appealing, while a close examination would reveal how groundless it is. The argument suffers from several critical fallacies.

In the first place, the arguer commits a fallacy of "After this and therefore because of this". In no case can the mere fact that one graduate of the course was able to read a five hundred page report in only two hours and another graduate get promoted as vice president be cited as evidence to support that there is a casual effect relationship between taking the Easy Read course and the tow persons' advance. Moreover, that just because taking the course can be statistically related to their improvement in reading ability does not necessarily mean that the course is the cause of their progress. In fact, the arguer has obviously neglected the possibility of other alternative facts which may, to a great extent, to effectiveness and efficiency in working  such as the graduates could bear originally the capability of reading fast which is cultivated in his college and this ability does not exhibit in the beginning because he was not familiar with his detailed working tasks at first. Unless the arguer can rule out the factors relevant to their reading speed, this assumption in question can not be acceptable.

In the second place, the reasoning flawed in that the argument bases a conclusion that is known to require two conditions on evidence that bears only one of them. Undoubtedly, whether the company would get benefit at last depends on two important factors, neither of which can be ignored. One is  the costs they pay for the course, the other is their revenue which they would acquire from the progress of their employees. Both would contribute to whether they would eventually make a fortune. Given the fact that they require all their employees to take the course, the payment is drastically a large amount of costs if the number of staff is very big, regardless of the low price. Needless to say, the fee of 500 dollars for per employ  itself is not low as many people think. And it some people having no interesting in course would strictly get progress in reading from course. Thus, the Acme would not positively win a sanguine benefit once the cost is much higher than thought and the effectiveness of taking the course is slim.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the author maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should provide more information concerning it is with the help of course that the two persons cited as evidence get true improved. To make the argument logically acceptable, the arguer should also demonstrate the course would definitely bring more benefit to the company than payment.  (550 words)

jxkingUID：141801

这么都没有人来看我的文章呀？

angel_naliUID：148055

argument比较简单。只要找出几个逻辑错误，字数应该不成问题。而且这个逻辑错误也没有具体的规定。以后我就不仔细看了，建议保持平和心态。Good luck

jxkingUID：141801

感谢上兄弟的点评