（推荐新手看这个帖）我的AW笔记本（内有老外280的分析，资料基本上看这个就够了）

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

153
The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper.
"Ever since the 1950's, when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer, over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time television—programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m.—should show less violence. Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."

In this argument, the arguer claims that in order to reduce the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand to decrease the amount of violence shown during prime time. To justify his claim, the arguer cites the results of several studies and a convey. On the first sight, this conclusion appears to be somewhat reasonable, but after a careful analysis, I find there are several flaws.

Firstly, the arguer confused the correlative relationship between the increased teenage crimes rate and the violence shown with the causal relationship. From the argument, we can only know that these two phenomena occurred at the same time. But there is no other evidence to show that violence shown contributed to the teenage delinquency. Maybe it is just a coincidence. Alternative reasons like high divorce rate, would also resulted in the increase of teenage violence. Lacking the home tendency and restriction would be the more important reason for teenage crime.

Secondly, there are some questions about the survey. Why 90% of parents demanded to decrease the violent shown? Maybe they themselves dislike such program, and so their indication has noting to do with teenage crime rate. Even though parents put forward such a suggestion for the sake of their children, I also perplexed about the restriction of 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. why such a prime time? Is it the period when the young watch TV program, but we cannot read such information from what the survey provide with us. In addition, from the survey quoted in the argument, however, we find no sign of such procedures for random sampling, and have good reason to doubt if the sample is representative enough to reflect the general attitude of the parents across the country.

Thirdly, according the argument, several national studies found that the young who watch more violence shown display more violent behavior with their home environment. It cannot explain the high crime rate. After all, home violent behavior differs from crime greatly.

From what discussed above, the evidence provided does not lead to the conclusion. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the reason of high teenage crime rate. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the studies and the survey.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 21:34 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

177
The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.
"Membership in Oak City's Civic Club—a club whose primary objective is to discuss local issues—should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of the city. It is important to restrict membership to city residents because only residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could best be used to improve the city. At any rate, restricting membership in this way is unlikely to disappoint many of the nonresidents employed in Oak City, since neighboring Elm City's Civic Club has always had an open membership policy, and only twenty-five nonresidents have joined Elm City's Club in the last ten years."

The arguer suggested that Oak City Civic Club should only berestricted to people lived in it's ow city. However, that it is illogic questioning. And after carefully reasoning, we can see it in detail.  

Firstly, no evidence is given to demonstrate that those people who work in O C but live elsewhere cannot really understand the business and politics of the city. Maybe most of the businessmen in O C come from other cities. If it is the case, it is impossible that they do not truly known the situation of OC. On the contrary, they are just those who are aware of the business and politics there most clearly.

Secondly, the author unfairly assumes that only those local residents pay taxes to its government, which lacks evidence. As the author points out in the argument, there are people works in O C but they do not live there. Then the possibility that some local residents living in O C work in other places exists. It is highly possible that they do not understand the local business clearly as expected.

Thirdly, the author conducts a false analogy between E C and OC .He or she ignores the differences of them. Though in the past ten years only 25 nonresidents were included in the E C'Club, no information indicates that they did not play an important role in the club because the total number of members in the club is not pointed out. If there are 50 members in the club totally during the past years, conclusion will be reached that nonresidents should not be ignored in the process of electing members. On the other hand, if it is true in E C the nonresidents are not important/are not dominated as supposed, the detailed situation concerning those nonresidents in O C remains unknown, which causes the claim unconvincing. Thus the suggestion will lead to disappointment and discontent of nonresidents in O C.

In conclution, the suggestion that the club should only restricted in O.C. is based on false analogy and unfairly assumes. The club should also consider think about civils in other city.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 21:37 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

190
The following is a letter to the editor of the Glenville Gazette, a local newspaper.
"Over the past few years, the number of people who have purchased advance tickets for the Glenville Summer Concert series has declined, indicating lack of community support. Although the weather has been unpredictable in the past few years, this cannot be the reason for the decline in advance ticket purchases, because many people attended the concerts even in bad weather. Clearly, then, the reason for the decline is the choice of music, so the organizers of the concert should feature more modern music in the future and should be sure to include music composed by Richerts, whose recordings Glenville residents purchase more often than any other contemporary recordings. This strategy will undoubtedly increase advance ticket purchases and will increase attendance at the concerts."

In the argument, the arguer concludes that it is undoubtedly that to feature more modern music including Richerts’ music could increase advance tickets purchases and increase attendance at the concerts. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that the unpredictable weather does not lead to the number of people who have purchased advance tickets for the Concert to decline. In addition, the arguer reasons that it is clear that the reason for the decline is the choice of music. The argument is problematic for two reasons.

In the first place, the arguer fails to consider other factors that may influence the number of people who have purchased advance tickets for the Concert. For instance, the residents may prefer other entertainment now; they may not afford the advance tickets because the fees of the advance tickets have been improved. It is possible that they like to stay home chatting with the family, not go out. Consequently, in the absence of all this information, it is impossible for us to evaluate the reason that the arguer concludes.

In the second place, the argument is based on an unwarranted assumption that to feature more modern music including Richerts’ music could increase advance tickets purchases. Even if the reason for the decline is the choice of music, it does not follow that feature more modern music including Richerts’ music could increase advance tickets purchase. The residents may prefer classic music rather than modern music. Although Richerts’ recordings sell better than other contemporary recordings, there is no guarantee that Glenville residents would like go to concert to listen Richerts’ music. It is more likely that Glenville residents prefer stay home to listen Richerts’ music than to go to concert. Actually, the arguer’ recommendation as the only way to increase advance tickets purchases would most probably turn out be ineffective and misleading.

To summary, the conclusion reached in the argument is invalid and misleading. To strengthen the conclusion, the arguer would have to provide evidence that the reason that the advance tickets purchases declined is indeed because of the choice of music. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information that the residents prefer modern music including Richerts’ music.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 21:39 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

238
The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of Mira Vista College to the college's board of trustees.
"At nearby Green Mountain College, which has more business courses and more job counselors than does Mira Vista College, 90 percent of last year's graduating seniors had job offers from prospective employers. But at Mira Vista College last year, only 70 percent of the seniors who informed the placement office that they would be seeking employment had found full-time jobs within three months after graduation, and only half of these graduates were employed in their major field of study. To help Mira Vista's graduates find employment, we must offer more courses in business and computer technology and hire additional job counselors to help students with their resumés and interviewing skills."

The differentiation between last year’s graduating seniors of Mira Vista College and those of Green Mountain College leads the author to think of where the problem lies in. By comparing the amount of business courses and number of job counselors of the two colleges, the author arrives at the conclusion that it is because of these factors that Mira Vista’s graduating seniors were not so successful as their peers from Green Mountain College. Therefore he/she insists that once these two problems are solved, Mira Vista College will see the success of its graduating seniors in job hunting. Plausible as the reasoning may be, the author has concentrated too much on this sole possibility and neglected others and therefore cannot make his argument convincing.

As we all know, there are a variety of majors of students in a college. Some study science; some pursue engineering; some devote themselves to art or literature and others take law, medical or business of course. Although business courses are necessary to those of business relevant majors, it does not follow that students of other majors have to, or benefit from them. Almost the same when it comes to computer technology courses. It is reasonable to offer them as discretionary lessons for those who are interested. Yet it makes no sense that a student who wants to be an engineer or dentist after graduation be obliged to take business lessons. And so does it as to make computer technology compulsory to literature majors. Obviously this will not be of help to the success of job hunting.

Although the author argues that there must be link between the business courses Mira Vista College offers and the high percentage of its graduating seniors that had job offers from prospective employers, the facts may also be interpreted in another way. Firstly, Green Mountain College may have been famous for its business school. Therefore it is natural that it offers more business courses than Mira Vista does. If the current job market is in great need of business employees, the success of Green Mountain’s graduates will be convincingly explained as well. On the other hand, colleges differentiate a lot from each other in academic reputation and research achievements. Possibly that Green Mountain College is a first class college while Mira Vista is, unfortunately, a second class one, the difference between the job offers gained by graduates from the two colleges will be understandable.

The author also takes it for granted that the job counselors of Green Mountain College must have helped a lot in the job pursuits of graduates there. It is probably true. But insofar no valid data is available to consolidate the presumption. In fact, whether job counselors are useful or not relies more on their effectiveness and efficiency rather than on the number of them. No comparisons are at hand to show the growth of job offers of Green Mountain after more job counselors were hired there.

In order to improve the situation of job-hunting of Mira Vista College, better curriculums and effective job counselors are necessary. But it will be of meager effect if the college merely provides more business and computer technology courses and jigh additional job counselors.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 21:41 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 2
The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deer haven Acres to all homeowners in Deer haven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting."

In this letter a committee of Deerhaven Acres homeowners recommends that in order to enhance Deerhaven property values homeowners should follow certain restrictions concerning their homes' exterior appearance. To support this recommendation the committee points out that in the seven years since Brookville adopted similar restrictions property values there have risen. This argument rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

A threshold assumption upon which the recommendation relies is that Brookville home owners implemented Brookville's restrictions in the first place. The letter fails to substantiate this crucial assumption. If these restrictions were not implemented, then any change in Brookville's property values cannot be attributed to them. Accordingly, the committee cannot draw any firm conclusion about what effect similar restrictions would have on Deer haven property values.

Even assuming that Brookville homeowners implemented these restrictions, the committee relies on the additional assumption that this course of action was responsible for the increase in Brookville property values. However, it is entirely possible that  oneor more other factors were instead responsible for the increase, especially since a considerable period of time has passed since Brookville adopted its restrictions. Property values are a function of supply and demand. Perhaps the demand for housing in the area has increased due to an influx of major employers. Or, perhaps the supply of housing has decreased. Either scenario would provide an alternative explanation for the increase in property values.

Even assuming that Brookville's rising property values are attributable to the implementation of these restrictions, the committee fails to consider possible differences between Brookville and Deer haven that might help to bring about a different result for Deer haven. For instance, potential Deer haven home-buyers might be less interested in a home's exterior appearance than Brookville home-owners. For that matter, perhaps Deer haven home-buyers would find consistent exterior appearance a distasteful feature in which case adopting these restrictions might actually tend to decrease Deer-haven property values.

Without accounting for these and other possible dissimilarities, the committee cannot assume that what resulted in rising property values in Brookville would bring about the same result in Deerhaven.

In conclusion, to persuade me that Deerhaven should adopt the proposed restrictions the committee must supply clear evidence that the implementation of Brookville's restrictions, and not some other factor, was responsible for the rise in Brookville's property values. The committee must also provide evidence that other factors affecting home prices in the two areas are otherwise essentially the same.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 21:42 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 11
The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.
"During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."

This editorial recommends that Alta Manufacturing reduce its work shifts by one hour each in order to reduce its on-the-job accident rate and thereby increase Alta's productivity. To support this recommendation the author points out that last year the number of accidents at Alta was 30% greater than at Panoply Industries, where work shifts were one hour shorter. The author also cites certain experts who believe that many on-the-job accidents are caused by fatigue and sleep deprivation. I find this the argument unconvincing for several reasons.

First and foremost, the author provides absolutely no evidence that overall worker productivity is attributable in part to the number of on-the-job accidents. Although common sense informs me that such a relationship exists, the author must provide some evidence of this cause-and-effect relationship before I can accept the author's final conclusion that the proposed course of action would in fact increase Alta's productivity.

Secondly, the author assumes that some accidents at Alta are caused by fatigue or sleep deprivation. However, the author overlooks other possible causes, such as inadequate equipment maintenance or worker training, or the inherent hazards of Alta's manufacturing processes. By the same token, Panoply's comparatively low accident rate might be attributable not to the length of its work shifts but rather to other factors, such as superior equipment maintenance or worker training. In other words, without ruling out alternative causes of on-the-job accidents at both companies, the author cannot justify conclude that merely by emulating Panoply's work-shift policy Alta would reduce the number of such accidents. Thirdly, even assuming that Alta's workers are fatigued or sleep-deprived, and that this is the cause of some of Alta's on-the-job accidents, in order to accept the author's solution to this problem we must assume that Alta's workers would use the additional hour of free time to sleep or rest. However, the author provides no evidence that they would use the time in this manner. It is entirely possible that Alta's workers would use that extra hour to engage in some other fatiguing activity. Without ruling out this possibility the author cannot convincingly conclude that reducing Alta's work shifts by one hour would reduce Alta's accident rate.

Finally, a series of problems with the argument arise from the scant statistical information on which it relies. In comparing the number of accidents at Alta and Panoply, the author fails to consider that the per-worker accident rate might reveal that Alta is actually safer than Panoply, depending on the total number of workers at each company. Second, perhaps accident rates at the two companies last year were aberrations, and during other years Alta's accident rate was no greater, or even lower, than Panoply's rate. Or perhaps Panoply is not representative of industrial companies generally, and that other companies with shorter work shifts have even higher accident rates. In short, since the argument relies on very limited statistical information I cannot take the author's recommendation seriously.

In conclusion, the recommendation for emulating Panoply's work-shift policy is not well supported. To convince me that shorter work shifts would reduce Alta's on-the-job accident rate, the author must provide clear evidence that work-shift length is responsible for some of Alta's accidents. The author must also supply evidence to support her final conclusion that a lower accident rate would in fact increase overall worker productivity.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 22:03 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 17
The following appeared in a letter from the manager of a rock band named Double Rice.

"One year ago, tickets for Double Rice's concerts in stadiums around the country took, on average, at least 24 hours to sell out, if they sold out at all. But the band has been enjoying a surge in nationwide popularity among 14 to 25 year olds, and the 30,000 tickets for a recent concert in Megalopolis sold out in 12 minutes. Clearly the ticket sales in Megalopolis are a result both of the band's increased popularity and of the advertising campaign run in Megalopolis by the Ad Lib advertising agency. Thus, in order to ensure that the band's success in Megalopolis is repeated across the country, the band should hire Ad Lib to duplicate the Megalopolis ad campaign on a nationwide scale."

The manager of the rock band Double Rice (DR) concludes that the band should hire the advertising agency Ad Lib to promote the band throughout the country. To justify this conclusion the manager cites Ad Lib's campaign to promote a recent DR concert at a large venue in Megalopolis. Tickets for this concert sold out in 12 minutes, whereas one year ago tickets for DR concerts at large venues rarely sold out in less than 24 hours--if at all. The manager reasons that the Megalopolis success must have been attributable to both Ad Lib's efforts and DR's popularity. The manager's argument is flawed in several critical respects.

To begin with, assuming that the Megalopolis success was in fact due to DR's popularity there, the manager overlooks the possibility that Ad Lib's campaign had nothing to do that popularity. Perhaps the band recently became overwhelmingly popular due to a new hit song or to a revival of the type of music DR plays. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine the manager's claim that Ad Lib's efforts are to be credited for the Megalopolis success.

The manager also overlooks the possibility that one or more factors other than Ad Lib's efforts or DWs popularity were instead responsible for the Megalopolis success. For instance, perhaps DR shared the bill at the concert with another band, whose appearance was the actual reason for the concert's success. If so, this fact would seriously weaken the manager's claim that the Megalopolis success is attributable to Ad Lib's efforts and to DR's popularity in Megalopolis--whether or not that popularity resulted from Ad Lib's campaign.

Even assuming that either DR's popularity or Ad Lib's campaign, or both, were responsible for the Megalopolis success, the manager's claim that this success can be repeated elsewhere might nevertheless be unwarranted. Megalopolis might not be representative of most dries in which DR plans to appear in any one of various ways which would adversely impact ticket sales in other dries. For instance, perhaps DR hails from Mega lopolis and has far more fans in Megalopolis than any other city. Or, perhaps the kind of ad campaign that is Ad lab's specialty, although effective in Megalopolis, would not be effective in most dries.

Finally, in conduding that DR must hire Ad Lib in order to ensure similar success throughout the country, the manager assumes that Ad Lib's services are both necessary and sufficient for this purpose. Yet the manager has not provided any evidence to substantiate either assumption. Lacking such evidence, it is just as likely that some other ad agency would be equally or more effective. Even ifad Lib's services are necessary to achieve the manager's goal, it is entirely possible that Ad Lib's services would not suffice to ensure similar success elsewhere--due to the sorts of factors mentioned above that might have contributed to the Megalopolis success but would not come into play in other dries.

In sum, the manager has not convinced me that DR's interests would be well served if and only ifit hires Ad Lib to promote the band throughout the country. To bolster the argument the manager must rule out all other possible reasons for the success of the Megalopolis concert, and must show that Ad Lib is capable of achieving similar success in other cities.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-17 22:06 编辑 ]

tjhhdldut2005UID: 202634

kan guo le

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 38
The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.
"The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."

The author of this letter concludes that a worldwide decline in the number of amphibians is an indication, or result, of global air and water pollution. To support this assertion the author first notes a decline in amphibians in Yosemite Park between 1915 and 1992, and acknowledges that trout, which eat amphibian eggs, were introduced there in 1925. But, the author then claims that the introduction of trout cannot be the reason for the decline in Yosemite because the introduction of trout in Yosemite does not explain the worldwide decline.

I find this argument logically unconvincing in three critical respects.

First, the author fails to provide any evidence to refute the strong inference that the amphibian decline in Yosemite was indeed caused by trout. Because the author provides no affirmative evidence that pollution---or some other phenomenon--was instead the reason for the decline, the author's broad assertion that a worldwide decline in amphibians indicates global pollution is entirely unconvincing.

Secondly, even if I were to concede that the introduction of trout was not the cause of Yosemite's amphibian decline, the author provides no evidence that the decline was caused by pollution--rather than some other phenomenon. Perhaps some other environmental factor was instead the cause. Without ruling out all other possible explanations the author cannot convince me that pollution is the cause of the worldwide amphibian decline--or even the decline in Yosemite alone.

Thirdly, even if I were to concede that pollution caused Yosemite's amphibian decline, this single sample is insufficient to draw any general conclusion about the reason for a worldwide amphibian decline. It is entirely possible that the cause-and-effect relationships in Yosemite are not typical of the world in general. Without additional samples from diverse geographic locations, I cannot accept the author's sweeping generalization about the decline of amphibians and global pollution.

In sum, the scant evidence the author cites proves nothing about the reason for the general decline of amphibians worldwide; in fact, this evidence only serves to refute the author's own argument. To strengthen the argument the author should examine all changes occurring in Yosemite between 1915 and 1992 and show that air and water pollution have at least contributed to the park's amphibian decline. In any event, the author must provide data about amphibian population changes and pollution at diverse geographical locations; and this data must show a strong inverse correlation between levels of air and water pollution and amphibian populations worldwide.

[ 本帖最后由 zhangheng1020 于 2006-3-18 19:17 编辑 ]

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 42
The following appeared in the editorial section of a health and fitness magazine.
"In a study of the effects of exercise on longevity, medical researchers tracked 500 middle-aged men over a 20-year period. The subjects represented a variety of occupations in several different parts of the country and responded to an annual survey in which they were asked: How often and how strenuously do you exercise? Of those who responded, the men who reported that they engaged in vigorous outdoor exercise nearly every day lived longer than the men who reported that they exercised mildly only once or twice a week. Given the clear link that this study establishes between longevity and exercise, doctors should not recommend moderate exercise to their patients but should instead encourage vigorous outdoor exercise on a daily basis."

This editorial concludes that to maximize longevity people should engage in vigorous outdoor exercise on a daily basis. To support this conclusion the editorial cites a 20-year study of 500 middle-aged men in which, among subjects responding to an annual survey, those who followed this regimen lived longer, on average, than those who exercised mildly once or twice per week. A careful analysis of the study reveals several problems with the editorial's argument.

First of all, the excerpt provides no information about the number of respondents or their occupational or residential profiles. The fewer respondents, the less reliable the study's results. Also, the narrower the spectrum of occupations and geographic areas represented among respondents, the more likely that one of these two phenomena, rather than exercise, played the key role in the subjects' longevity. Moreover, once a subject dies it would be impossible for that subject to respond to the annual survey. Unless a sufficient number of subjects from diverse geographic areas and occupations responded accurately and on a regular basis, and unless accurate responses were made on behalf of deceased subjects, I simply cannot accept the editorial's conclusion.

Secondly, a 20-year time span might not be sufficient to gauge the longevity of the study's subjects; that is, until a significant number of subjects have died, it is impossible to determine with certainty the effect of exercise on the subjects' longevity as a group. Lacking information about how many deaths among the 500 subjects were reported by the end of the study, it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusion about the relationship between exercise and longevity.

Thirdly, the editorial fails to indicate how many or what percentage of the respondents engaged in vigorous outdoor exercise on a daily basis. Lacking this information, it is entirely possible that only a few subjects matched this profile and that those few subjects happened to live to an old age--due to some factor other than exercise habits. The longevity of a small number of respondents is scant evidence upon which to draw any broad conclusions about the effect of exercise on longevity.

Finally, even if we accept the reliability of the study as it relates to men, the study does not support the editorial's broad conclusion that doctors should recommend to all patients vigorous daily outdoor exercise. Since the study excluded women, it is entirely possible that a different exercise regime would maximize female longevity.

In sum, the evidence cited in this excerpt does not permit any reliable inference about the effect of exercise on longevity. To better assess the study's reliability I would need more information about the number of respondents and the number of deaths among them by the end of the 20-year period. I would also need information about the occupational and residential history of each respondent. To strengthen the argument the editorial should either limit its conclusion to men or provide evidence that its recommended exercise regimen also maximizes longevity for women.

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 47
The nation of Claria covers a vast physical area. But despite wide geographic differences, many citizens are experiencing rising costs of electricity. A recent study of household electric costs in Claria found that families who cooled their houses with fans alone spent more on electricity than did families using air conditioners alone for cooling. However, those households that reported using both fans and air conditioners spent less on electricity than those households that used either fans or air conditioners alone. Thus, the citizens of Claria should follow the study's recommendation and use both air conditioners and fans in order to save money on electricity.

This argument recommends that all citizens of Claria should use fans as well as air conditioners, for the purpose of saving money on electricity. To support this recommendation, the argument's proponent points out that Claria citizens who run only fans incur higher electric costs than those who use only air conditioners, and that those who run both incur the lowest electric costs among the three groups. However, the argument depends on certain dubious assumptions about climate, electric costs, and the cited statistics. As a result, the recommendation is ill-conceived.

First, the argument relies on the assumption that climatic conditions are similar throughout all regions of Claria. Yet this is probably not the case, especially since the passage explicitly characterizes Claria as vast and widely diverse geographically. It is entirely possible that only fans are used in certain regions because the climate in these regions is comparatively cold year-round, and that electric heating costs are so high that they result in the highest overall electric costs in the country. If this is the case, implementing the proponent's suggestion would result in higher electric costs for citizens in these regions. Or perhaps people who run both fans and air conditioners live in regions where there is less need for artificial cooling. This would explain why total electric costs in these regions are comparatively low. If this is the case, then implementing the proponent's suggestion might still result in higher electric costs for citizens in other regions.

Secondly, the recommendation depends on the assumption that the cost of electricity is the same for all three groups. However, it is possible that people who use both fans and air conditioners incur the lowest total electric costs among the three groups simply because these people pay the least per unit of electricity. The fact that Claria is geographically diverse lends support to this notion; people who use both fans and air conditioners are likely to live in the same climatic region, and people in the same region are more likely to be subject to the same electricity usage rates.

Thirdly, the argument provides insufficient information about the study on which it relies. If the results were based on only one warm season then the argument would be less persuasive than if the results were based on more than one warm season; in other words, the larger the statistical sample the more reliable the results.

In conclusion, the recommendation for using both cooling methods is dubious at best. To bolster it, the argument's proponent must show that climatic conditions are similar in all regions. The proponent must also show that rates charged for electricity are similar in all regions. Finally, in order to better evaluate the extent to which the cited study supports the recommendation we would need more statistical information about the study's time span.

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 51
The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.
"In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham."

This editorial concludes that the town of Rockingham would save money by replacing its old town hall with a larger, more energy-efficient one. To support the argument the editorial's author cites the need for a larger building to comfortably accommodate employees, and the fact that the proposed building would cost less per cubic foot to heat and cool than the current building would. However, the editorial is unconvincing for several reasons.

First of all, even though it would cost less per cubic foot to heat and cool the new building, because the new building would be larger the total cooling and heating costs might actually be greater than they are now. Add to this possibility the initial cost of replacing the structure, and in all likelihood the new building would not save money for the town. Besides, the argument ignores other, potentially less expensive, means of reducing current heating and cooling costs--for example, retrofitting the building with a new climate control system.

Secondly, the editorial relies partly on the fact that the current building cannot comfortably accommodate all the people who work in it. However, this fact in itself is irrelevant to whether the town would save money by replacing the building. Besides, the editorial ignores other, potentially less expensive, solutions to the current comfort problem--for example, adding an annex to the current structure.

Thirdly, the editorial relies partly on the assertion that the town could generate income by renting out part of a larger new building. However, the author equivocates here--on the one hand claiming that a larger building is needed because the old one is too small to accommodate employees, while on the other hand proposing that the additional space not be used to solve this problem. The use of conflicting evidence to support the same conclusion renders the argument wholly unpersuasive.

In conclusion, the editorial is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the assertion that a new building would save the town money, the editorial's author must provide a detailed analysis comparing the cost of cooling and heating the current hall to the anticipated cost of cooling and heating the new hall. In this analysis, the author must factor in the initial cost of replacing the old hall, as well as the additional rental income that the larger hall might generate.

Finally, the author must choose between two competing objectives: creating a more spacious environment for current employees or creating a larger hall for the purpose of generating rental income.

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 65
The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.
"Membership in Oak City's Civic Club---a club whose primary objective is to discuss local issues---should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. People who work-in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of the city. It is important to restrict membership to city residents because only residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could best be used to improve the city. At any rate, restricting membership in this way is unlikely to disappoint many of the nonresidents employed in Oak City, since neighboring Elm City's Civic Club has always had an open membership policy, and only twenty-five nonresidents have joined Elm City's Club in the last ten years."

This letter recommends that membership in Oak City's Civic Club, the primary objective of which is to discuss local issues, be limited to local residents. To support this recommendation, the author claims that since only residents pay local taxes they are the only people who sufficiently understand local business and political issues. The author also cites the fact that in the last ten years very few non-residents of Oak City who work in Oak City have joined nearby Elm City's civic club, which is open to any person. The argument suffers from two critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

To begin with, the letter fails to adequately support the claim that since only residents pay local taxes only they truly understand local business and political issues. Even given the dubious assumption that being a local taxpayer affords one an understanding of local business and political issues, it is fallacious to conclude that being a local taxpayer is a necessary condition for understanding these issues. Moreover, common sense tells me that local business people, residents or not, would probably be more intimately involved in many such issues than local residents who do not have business interests in the town. Having failed to address this distinct possibility, the letter is wholly unconvincing.

In further support of the recommendation, the letter cites the fact that nearby Elm City's civic club is open to any person, yet very few Oak City business people who are not residents have joined Elm City's club in the last ten years. But this fact alone lends no support to the recommendation. It is possible, for instance, that these business people have no connection with Elm City whatsoever, or that these business people have been members of Elm City's civic club for longer than ten years. The author must eliminate these possibilities in order to rely justifiably on this evidence for his or her recommendation.

In conclusion, the letter's author fails to adequately support the recommendation that Oak City civic club membership be restricted to local residents. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide dear evidence that non-residents who work in Oak City do not understand local issues as well as residents do. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about why non-resident business people in Oak City have not joined Elm City's civic club during the last ten years.

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 67
The following is a memorandum written by the director of personnel to the president of the Cedar Corporation.
"It would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year. It is the second most expensive caterer in the city. In addition, its prices have risen in each of the last three years, and it refuses to provide meals for people on special diets. Just last month three employees complained to me that they no longer eat in the cafeteria because they find the experience 'unbearable.' Our company should instead hire Discount Foods. Discount is a family-owned local company and it offers a varied menu of fish and poultry. I recently tasted a sample lunch at one of the many companies that Discount serves and it was delicious---an indication that hiring Discount will lead to improved employee satisfaction."

This memo recommends that Cedar Corporation replace its current food provider, Good-Taste, with Discount Foods. To support this recommendation, the memo's author cites Good-Taste's increasing fees, the fact that three Cedar employees refuse to eat in the cafeteria, and various features of Discount Foods. For several reasons, this evidence fails to provide adequate support for the recommendation.

The memo's reliance on the fact that three Cedar employees find eating in the company cafeteria "unbearable" presents two problems. First, the memo unfairly assumes that Good-Taste is responsible for these complaints. It is entirely possible that other conditions in the cafeteria are instead responsible. Second, the memo assumes that complaints by only three Cedar employees constitutes a statistically significant number which warrants replacing Good-Taste with another food provider. However, the memo provides no evidence that this is the case.

Another problem with the recommendation is that it relies partly on the fact that Good Taste has been increasing its fees and is now the second-most-expensive food provider available to Cedar. Yet the recommendation is based on what food provider would best satisfy Cedar's employees, not what provider would reduce Cedar's costs. In other words, this evidence is not directly relevant to the reasons for the author's recommendation. Even if expense were a legitimate factor, it is possible that Discount is even more expensive than Good-Taste.

Yet another problem with the recommendation is that it relies partly on the need to accommodate employees with special dietary needs. The memo provides no evidence that Good-Taste is any less capable than Discount of accommodating these employees. Rather, the memo merely provides that Discount offers "a varied menu of fish and poultry." Without a more detailed comparison between the offerings of the two companies, it is unfair to conclude that one would meet the needs of Cedar's employees better than the other would.

Finally, the recommendation relies partly on the fact that in one taste test the memo's author found Discount Foods to be "delicious." In all likelihood, however, the author's tastes do not represent the collective tastes of Cedar employees; accordingly, the author's report is patently insufficient to demonstrate that Cedar's employees would be more satisfied with Discount than with Good-Taste.

In conclusion, the letter's author fails to adequately support the recommendation that Cedar replace Good-Taste with Discount. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide clear evidence that Cedar employees are dissatisfied with Good-Taste's food, and that they would be more satisfied with Discount's food. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information comparing the two companies' menus to determine which is more varied and caters to those with special dietary needs.

zhangheng1020UID: 2130513

Argument 117
The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"There is now evidence that the relaxed manner of living in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. Furthermore, Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents, but in Mason City the proportion of physicians to residents is five times as high. And the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These findings suggest that people seeking longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities."

This newspaper story concludes that living in a small town promotes health and longevity. The story's author bases this conclusion on a comparison between the small town of LeeviUe and nearby Mason City, a much larger town. However, careful scrutiny of the author's evidence reveals that it lends no credible support to the author's conclusion. A threshold problem with the argument is that the author draws a general conclusion about the effect of a town's size on the health and longevity of its residents based only on characteristics of two towns. The author provides no evidence that these two towns (or their residents) are representative of other towns their size. In other words, this limited sample simply does not warrant any general conclusions about the effect of a town's size on the health and longevity of its residents.

Next, the author cites the fact that the incidence of sick leave in Leeville is less than in Mason City. This evidence would lend support to the argument only if the portion of local residents employed by local businesses were nearly the same in both towns, and only if the portion of employees who are local residents were nearly the same in both towns. Moreover, in relying on this evidence the author assumes that the portion of sick employees who actually take sick leave is nearly the same in both towns. In short, without showing that the two towns are similar in these ways, the author cannot draw any reliable comparisons about the overall health of the towns' residents--or about the impact of town size on health. The author also cites the fact that Mason City has five times as many physicians per resident than Leeville. However, any number of factors besides the health of the towns' residents might explain this disparity. For example, perhaps Leeville residents choose to travel to Mason City for physician visits. Without ruling out such explanations, these physician-resident ratios prove nothing about the comparative health of LeeviUe and Mason City residents---or about the impact of town size on health.

Finally, the author cites the fact that the average age of Leeville residents is higher than that of Mason City residents. However, any number of factors might explain this disparity. For example, perhaps Leeville is a retirement community, while Mason City attracts younger working people. For that matter, perhaps LeeviUe is comprised mainly of former Mason City residents whose longevity is attributable chiefly to their former life-style in Mason City. In any event, the author cannot justify the conclusion that this disparity in average age is due to the difference in size between the two towns.

In conclusion, the argument that small-town living promotes good health and longevity is unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument the author must provide clear evidence that the overall population of Leeville, not just employees in LeeviUe, is healthier than that of Mason City. The author must also provide strong evidence that Leeville and Mason City residents visit local physicians whenever they become sick. Finally, to better evaluate the argument we would need more information about why the average age of Leeville residents exceeds that of Mason City residents.