Argument185 帮我改改吧

blijiangUID: 194167

185,"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside　Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towerswill increase our profits further."

The author recommends in the argument that it will increase our profits further by restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Tower. To support his recommendation, he/she assumes that by restricting the water flow of the first five floors of the Sunnyside Tower to approximate 1/3 of its original force the Sunnyside Corporation can get a considerable savings. He also cites the evidence that no problems have been reported since the adjustment except for a few complaints. However, after a close scrutiny I find the argument is logically flawed in several respects as discussed below.

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the company can really get a considerable savings and increase the company’s profits in the result of restricting the first five floors. Since there are no actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment, it is entirely possible that the water usage after the adjustments actually is the same with that of before the adjustment although the water pressure is much lower. Lacking such evidence, the change perhaps will not result in a considerable savings.

Even assuming that the company can get a considerable savings after restricting the firs five floors’ water usage, the argument also unfairly assumes that no problems with the showers will be reported again after the company restricts all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Tower. Although there are only a few complaints after the first dive floors’ water flow is restricted, there may still occur some large and serious problems if all the floors’ water are restricted, because maybe the next 15 floors are key places and more important to the people than the first five floors, or perhaps the first five floors’ people have always been absent from the tower. If the company adopts the author’s recommendation, maybe several serious problems will take place and many people will raise complaints.

Finally, even assuming there is really no problem and still a few complaints after restricting all the floors, the author provides no evidence that the company can still increase profits. Perhaps the water usage of the next 15 floors will even increase because more people will take a longer showers, thus the total net water usage may still keep at the same level with that of before, or even increase as a whole. Thus without ruling out such a possibility, the argument remains unconvincing.

In sum, the argument’ author cannot justify his/her recommendation on the basis of the scant evidence in the argument. To bolster the author should provide more reliable evidence that the change really result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Tower, and there will still be no problems and just a few complaints.

449 words.

雪兔UID: 194053

我先占座:D

雪兔UID: 194053

No.1 Argument185 帮我改改吧
185,"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of
Sunnyside　Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to
approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of
water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available,
the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for
Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water
each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure,
no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment.
Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of
Sunnyside Towerswill increase our profits further."

The author recommends in the argument that it will increase our
profits further by restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors
of Sunnyside Tower. To support his [这里怎么没有her]recommendation, he/she assumes that
by restricting the water flow of the first five floors of the
Sunnyside Tower to approximate 1/3 of its original force the Sunnyside
Corporation can get a considerable savings[a后面还加s啊]. He also cites the
evidence that no problems[不应该有s啊] have been reported since the adjustment
except for a few complaints. However, after a close scrutiny I find
the argument is logically flawed in several respects as discussed below.
[我觉得开头不错，因为本人喜欢这样开头，不过好象有人说太多了]
To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the company can really
get a considerable savings and increase the company’s profits in the
result of restricting the first five floors. Since there are no actual
readings of water usage before and after the adjustment, it is
entirely possible that the water usage after the adjustments actually
is the same with that of before the adjustment although the water
pressure is much lower. Lacking such evidence, the change perhaps will
not result in a considerable savings. [换个词？]

Even assuming that the company can get a considerable savings after
restricting the firs five floors’ water usage, the argument also
unfairly assumes that no[ problems] with the showers will be reported
again after the company restricts all the 20 floors of Sunnyside
Tower. Although there are[is] only a few complaints after the first dive
floors’ water flow is restricted, there may still occur some large
and serious problems if all the floors’ water are restricted, because
maybe the next 15 floors are key places and more important to the
people than the first five floors, or perhaps the first five floors’
people have always been absent from the tower. If the company adopts
the author’s recommendation, maybe several serious problems will
take place and many people will raise complaints.

Finally, even assuming there is really no problem and still a few
complaints [好象这里少谓语吧？]after restricting all the floors, the author provides no
evidence that the company can still increase profits. Perhaps the water
usage of the next 15 floors will even increase because more people
will take a longer showers, thus the total net water usage may still
keep at the same level with that of before, or even increase as a whole
. Thus without ruling out such a possibility, the argument remains
unconvincing.

In sum, the argument’ author cannot justify his/her recommendation
on the basis of the scant evidence in the argument. To bolster the
author should provide more reliable evidence that the change really
result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Tower, and there will
still be no problems and just a few complaints.
[结尾可以吧]
本人是新人，意见仅供参考
你写的不错啊，逻辑论证的也不错呢，也没有大的语法错误，只是还要提高语言啊，字数也有点少吧
你什么时候考呢;)

449 words.

blijiangUID: 194167

3xs.终于看到有人帮我改作文了。
我三月一号就考试了。呵呵

最初由 雪兔 发布
[B]No.1 Argument185 帮我改改吧
185,"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of
Sunnyside　Towers were modified to restrict the water flow t..

以下省略...... [/B]