Argument4 小女子的第一篇，大家帮忙啊，快考了

静静发呆UID: 194347

Argument4 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：28分21秒     414 words
从2005年1月23日19时39分到2005年1月23日20时28分
------题目------
The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.
'Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams.'
------正文------
In this statement the arguer recommends Adams Realty to sell home since it is superior to Fitch, another leading firm. To support this assertion, the arguer compares the number of agents and revenue situation of the two firms, and also cites his/her own experience of home-selling. Compelling as it appears, after further inquisition, this assertion is replete with several critical logical fallacies.

To begin with, the presumption of this recommendation is problematic. The arguer suggests the importance role the real estate plays in how fast and at what price a house is sold. This may be true. However, he/she ignores other factors may affect such kind of selling. As my observation, the selling of a house is also greatly based on the location, the weather, the ornament or even the history. By neglecting these factors, the presumption is one-sided and therefore not logical convincing.

Also, as we examine the evidence to support the suggestion, the comparison is incomplete. The arguer firstly mentions the difference of numbers of agents of the two firms, but he didn't establish causal relationship between the working force and the quality of a firm, which means that even less part-time agents may induce better working efficiency and performance. Also the arguer provided us the revenue situation of the two firms to illustrate that A is better than F. However, such data is vague and questionable. As he/she said, the revenue of A is twice as that of F, but what we see in numbers are just home sales which is not twice. This difference in revenue may imply a higher charge from A and hence impedes it from being the first choice of customers.

In addition, the arguer cited his/her own experience of selling houses in the two firms. But we find this comparison unfair. The arguer did not provide us enough information about the two different house sold and therefore this comparison may be confusing since we cannot judge how a real estate firm performed in this selling regarding different objects, that is , houses. Furthermore, even the arguer successfully convinced us his/her own experience, whether this experience is representative is under question. So not a hasty conclusion can be drawn.

To better support this recommendation, the arguer had better provide true and detailed information about working quality, service situation and fee-charge of the two firms, and also some convincing comparison and compelling illustration are needed to make this assertion better accepted.

静静发呆UID: 194347

顶一下

朽木白哉UID: 195804

In this statement the arguer recommends Adams Realty to sell home since it is superior to Fitch, another leading firm. To support this assertion, the arguer compares the number of agents and revenue situation of the two firms, and also cites his/her own experience of home-selling. Compelling as it appears, after further inquisition, this assertion is replete with several critical logical fallacies.

To begin with, the presumption of this recommendation is problematic. The arguer suggests the importance role the real estate plays in how fast and at what price a house is sold. This may be true. However, he/she ignores other factors may affect such kind of selling. As my observation, the selling of a house is also greatly based on the location, the weather, the ornament or even the history. By neglecting these factors, the presumption is one-sided and therefore not logical convincing.

Also, as we examine the evidence to support the suggestion, the comparison is incomplete. The arguer firstly mentions the difference of numbers of agents of the two firms, but he didn't establish causal relationship between the working force and the quality of a firm, which means that even less part-time agents may induce better working efficiency and performance. Also [换个句型吧] the arguer provided us the revenue situation of the two firms to illustrate that A is better than F. However, such data is vague and questionable. As he/she said, the revenue of A is twice as that of F, but what we see in numbers are just home sales which is not twice. This difference in revenue may imply a higher charge from A and hence impedes it from being the first choice of customers.

In addition, the arguer cited his/her own experience of selling houses in the two firms. But we find this comparison unfair. The arguer did not provide us enough information about the two different house sold and therefore this comparison may be confusing since we cannot judge how a real estate firm performed in this selling regarding different objects, that is , houses. Furthermore, even the arguer successfully convinced us his/her own experience, whether this experience is representative is under question. So, not a hasty conclusion can be drawn.
[攻击的很无力 应该主要说出售两个房子的时间长短 不能说A卖的更快]

To better support this recommendation, the arguer had better provide true and detailed information about working quality, service situation and fee-charge of the two firms, and also some convincing comparison and compelling illustration are needed to make this assertion better accepted.

朽木白哉UID: 195804

总的讲还不错
特别是前面几段~~`
加油加油~~~`
=皿=