argument4

cuilei_1985UID: 2121020

Argument4  第21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：30分2秒     490 words
从2005年7月29日20时38分到2005年7月29日21时30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------
The arguer concludes that Adams is superior to Fitch Realty. To support his conclusion, he makes a series of contrasts to show A ( Adams) is more advantaged than F ( Fitch Realty). However, close scrutiny of these contrasts, there are some logical problems in this argument.

First, the arguer  unfairly assumes that the number of real estate agents can differentiate which one of the two is superior. However, only contrasts of the numbers can not convince A is better. Maybe even though F has a smaller number, its service quality is much better. Perhaps the average scope of each agents in F is much larger than A.Therefore, the number is not important in convincing me the conclusion.

Secondly, the arguer unfairly believe most of the Fitch's worker are part-time can conclude F is inferior to A. However, it is too vague to be informative. On the one hand, the arguer has not given whether A's worker are part-time workers.Maybe there are more part-time workers in A. Even if we concede that F's parttime workers are more than A, it is possible that they can earn more profits than those in A because they are more eligible and energic. Therefore, only from the contrast of work time can demonstrate no certain conclusion.

Thirdly, the arguer simply believe the more a company get its revenue, the better the company. However, the corelations are not a real casual relationship. He fails to take into account other possible factors. It is entrily possible that A has three times employees than F has and perhaps their costs are four times than F.Moreover, the contrast of the average home sales can not justify A is superior. Maybe A has earned less because the average areas they sell are much larger than homes sold by F, so they may earn less profits than F. In that case, we can not believe A is clearly superior to F.

Fourth, the arguer also has a unconvincing contrast between the time two companies help him sell out his houses. Above all, the house was not the same, perhaps it is just the advantage in house itself that leads to a faster speed in A. In addition, the two houses are not sold out in the mean time. Different times can have different tendency of real estates. Maybe when A sells his house, the need is more urgent. Therefore, the arguer has made a hasty conclusion that A is superior unless he fails out other possibilities.

In sum, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the arguer has to provide more specific datas about the two companies to ensure A has made more profits than F and A's work is more efficient than those of F. To further assess the argument, I would also need to know which company is faster in selling the houses with the same conditions at the present.