查看: 2079|回复: 3

[a习作temp] Argument 4 高频，为什么我ISSUE可以限时成功ARGU却不行，拍了那么多，大家也拍 [复制链接]

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1690
注册时间: 2004-8-20
精华: 2
帖子: 1

发表于 2005-4-4 07:26:10 |显示全部楼层

Argument X 额外题库第4篇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：37分25秒    459 words
从2005年3月4日6时41分到2005年3月4日7时37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------
From comparing the two real estates, Adams Realty and Fitch Realty, the arguer concludes that Adams is superior. To substantiate this claim, the arguer cites the evidence about the scale of the two estates --------- Adams has 40 real estates compared to 25 of Fitch, most of which work only part time. In addition, the arguer present the statistics that Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch more importantly, the time it took to sell is less. While this argument has some merit, it is vulnerable in several critical flaws that seriously undermine the line of reasoning.

First, the arguer unfairly claims that Adams is superior only by the number of estates the two companies own. There is no denying that Adams has more real estate agents than those of Fitch, 40 to 25 are apparent. However, it is also quite possible that Fitch gain more profit, which is the first goal in the process of business than Adams in terms of the only 25 real estate agents, which are large, popular among people and the like.  Therefore we cannot make a decision that only through the superficial statistics which is unconvincing.

Second, in the line of reasoning the arguer cites tremendous statistics for demonstrating his claim that Adams is superior, including the revenue the two companies were imposed last year, the average sales about their homes. Just logical these statistics seem to be, however, it suffers a critical fault.  Revenue of last year, possibly could tell us the profit the company gained under the law, but revenue of last year could not tell us which one is better. It is likely that Adams' revenue was only a little higher than that of Fitch last year, always sharply lower than that of Fitch in the past and in the future. The reason that the average sales of homes of Fitch is low is that only one case impeded its profit while others are quite high in contrast of Adams whose sales of homes are extremes low except one or two cases. Thus, the statistics indeed only cheat us rather than show us which company is better.

Finally, there exists nowhere more ridiculous than the last evidence the arguer provides, which is due to the arguer's own experience in listing houses in the two real estates. For convincing the reader that it took less time to sell homes in Adams than Fitch, the arguer told us that he himself listed his home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell compared to one month in Adams. One thing is worth mentioning which is that the time the two kind of deals happened. One is ten years before the other. How can we draw a fair conclusion with such a unconvincing statistics. In ten years, baby could grow up to adolescence, China could become stronger in the world, computers could live from lab to family, and in ten years Fitch could sell its homes in one day rather in one month. Therefore, this experience deserves only to be nothing but vague.

In sum, this argument is not persuasive as it stands for some silly mistakes the arguer makes. To make it logical and acceptable, the arguer should provide the specific profit the two companies gained both in the past and last year rather than only the number of estates agents and revenue. To make it more convincing the arguer would have to compare the time the two agents use to sell homes now rather ten years ago.