阿狗处女作，请多指教

dcmlfrogUID: 200892

argument 41:
The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food-distribution company with food-storage warehouses in several cities.
'Recently we signed a contract with The Fly-Away Pest-Control Company to provide pest-control services at our fast-food warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, which we have used for many years, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff Company for all our pest-control services.'


The author advocates that we should return to Buzzoff Company for all of the pest-control services to save money. To support the conclusion, the arguer compares the values of the food destroyed by pest controlled by Fly-Away Pest-Control Company and by Buzzoff Company .it seems the later one provided a better service than the former. But in fact this argument is unconvincing for overlooking some important condition for comparison.
The first problem is that the two companies provide service in different cities. There is no description about the weather, the geographic condition, the number and categories of the pest and other important information relative to these two cities. It is possible the weather and geographic condition are much more suitable for pest living in Palm City than in Wintervale What's more,  the environment in Palm city may help the pest to escape from control so easily that it is more difficult for Fly-Away Pest-Control Company to restrict the pest population.  Another imaginable situation is that there is a much lager population of pest in the former city than the later one before the companies try to control them so that even if Fly-Away Pest-Control Company pay much greater effort and kill a lager number of pest it still have to suffer a more serious lost in food damaged by pests. So if these two companies exchange the cites they serve, it may turn out to be an altered result. And the kinds of pests can also affect the efficiency and difficulty of the controlling work. It is probable that Fly-Away Pest-Control Company encountered a kind of pest which has a strong immune system.  
The arguer also takes another assumption that the two companies are controlling pests for the same quantity and quality of food. But we find no evidence for that. If we consider such a situation: Two students work on mathematic question. One has 100 very complex questions while the other only need to finish 20 easy ones. Is it fair to evaluate these to students only through the scores they get? So if the former company has to take care of a bigger amount of food which is favored more by pests, we cannot say it provide a worse service.
Provide that Buzzoff Company can control the pest number better than Fly-Away Pest-Control Company; it doesn’t mean that we will save money by returning to the former one. Because the author didn’t tell us how much we have to pay for the service to these two companies. If the service provided by Buzzoff Company requires much more fee, it might be not wise to return to it.
To sum up, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer has to provide us more details of the two companies. Before enough information are received, we should not make the final decision about whether return to Buzzoff Company.

dcmlfrogUID: 200892

没人理，555，月底就要考了，求大家帮忙呀！！

comingsoonUID: 175137

Argument 41:
The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a food-distribution company with food-storage warehouses in several cities.
Recently we signed a contract with The Fly-Away Pest-Control Company to provide pest-control services at our fast-food warehouse in Palm City, but last month we discovered that over $20,000 worth of food there had been destroyed by pest damage. Meanwhile, the Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, which we have used for many years, continued to service our warehouse in Wintervale, and last month only $10,000 worth of the food stored there had been destroyed by pest damage. Even though the price charged by Fly-Away is considerably lower, our best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff Company for all our pest-control services.


The author advocates that we should return to Buzzoff Company for all of the pest-control services to save money. To support the conclusion, the arguer compares the values of the food destroyed by pest controlled by Fly-Away Pest-Control Company and by Buzzoff Company .it seems the later latter one provided a better service than the former. But in fact this argument is unconvincing for overlooking some important condition for comparison.
The first problem is that the two companies provide service in different cities. There is no description about the weather, the geographic condition, the number and categories of the pest and other important information relative to these two cities. It is possible the weather and geographic condition are much more suitable for pest living in Palm City than in Wintervale. What is more, the environment in Palm city may help the pest to escape from control so easily that it is more difficult for Fly-Away Pest-Control Company to restrict the pest population. Another imaginable situation is that there is a much lager larger population of pest in the former city than the later one before the companies try to control them so that even if Fly-Away Pest-Control Company pay much greater effort and kill a lager number of pest it still have to suffer a more serious lost in food damaged by pests. So if these two companies exchange the cites they serve, it may turn out to be an altered result. And the kinds of pests can also affect the efficiency and difficulty of the controlling work. It is probable that Fly-Away Pest-Control Company encountered a kind of pest which has a strong immune system.
The arguer also takes another assumption that the two companies are controlling pests for the same quantity and quality of food. But we find no evidence for that. If we consider such a situation: Two students work on mathematic question. One has 100 very complex questions while the other only need to finish 20 easy ones. Is it fair to evaluate these to students only through the scores they get? 感觉这样的对比用在这里不好，本来就是要你说清楚的，你却用其他的例子来比喻^^ So if the former company has to take care of a bigger amount of food which is favored more by pests, we cannot say it provide a worse service.
Provide that Buzzoff Company can control the pest number better than Fly-Away Pest-Control Company; it doesn’t mean that we will save money by returning to the former one. Because the author didn’t没必要用过去时吧？ tell us how much we have to pay for the service to these two companies. If the service provided by Buzzoff Company requires much more fee, it might be not wise to return to it. 题目已经明确说明了buzzoff需要更多的费用…其实应该说作者没有提供足够的有关价格的信息，如果buzzoff高处的费用不能用来补偿少的损失的话，那就还是不省钱
To sum up, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer has to provide us more details of the two companies. Before enough information are received, we should not make the final decision about whether return to Buzzoff Company.


如果有时间的话，楼主帮我看看argu88吧。^^

dcmlfrogUID: 200892

多谢多谢，感激不尽