Argument73 [infinity小组]第六次作业

mayaUID: 199038

Argument 73
The following appeared in a memo from a manager of a car dealership.

"Ten years ago, long-term car leasing became available in our country of Mohilia as an alternative to outright car ownership, and leasing has steadily risen in popularity. For each of the last five years, the number of people leasing new cars has surpassed the number buying new cars. The average age of cars driven in Mohilia is six years; hence, if new car leases again outnumber purchases this year, it is likely that the majority of drivers will be driving leased, not individually owned, cars. Therefore, we should change the focus of our business from selling cars to leasing them."
OUTLINE： 1.10年前不能说明现在的情况，有可能现在已经不流行了。                                               TIME：40 min
           2.同样是时间的问题，过去的五年，尽管每年都如此趋势，但也不能说明现在就还存在此类趋势
           3.加车平均年龄与租车趋势无关

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. Merely based on unfounded assumption and dubious evidence the memo draws a conclusion that the residents in country of Mohilia should change the focus on leasing car nor purchasing car. To support the conclusion, the memo points out the evidence that ten years ago the leasing had risen in popularity. In addition, the memo indicates that the number of people who bought cars are less than the leased drivers. Furthermore, an evidence of surpassing leasing cars will be shown again this year. A careful examination of this argument reveals how groundless it is. There are several critical flaws as follows.

The major problem of the argument is the time. The memo indicates that car leasing became popular ten years ago. This is an obvious wrong correlation with the conclusion. The conditions of ten yars ago cannot tell us that there is a same situation today. It is possible that the popularity of leasing cars is available to the residents of Mohilia ten years ago, but not the same as today. The rising of the popularity cannot show us that the drivers were preferring leasing cars. Just as some costumes are popular in one season, but people are not likely to try on it.

Also with the above problem, the memo points out that the number of people leasing cars surpassed the number purchasing cars. The memo have not provided more information about today's drivers' opinions. Maybe after the past five years, the residents prefer buying new cars, but not leasing new cars. Even if this tendency can be continued, the memo has not guaranteed that the whole numbers of people leasing cars is a larger number than people buying new cars. If the memo recommend us to focus on the business of selling cars, they should provide the interests from this business. Otherwise, we should be very cautious to it.

Except for the above flaws made by the memo, the average age of cars is also a problem. In the memo's opinion, it seems that he wanted to tell us that the leasing car can provide you six years interests. If this is real, then the residents can consider this business. However, the memo has not talked more about this information. Even if the interests obtained from the leasing cars can be continued for six years, but the memo can make sure that some accidents can break. For instance, new laws prohibit this behavior or the passion of the residents for leasing cars will decline.

To sum up, the conclusion reached in this argument lacks credibility since the evidence quoted in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the memo maintains. To make it more convincing, the memo would have to provide more specific evidence concerning that the situation with the time-ten years ago is also the same as the today's situation. To better evaluate the argument, we need more concrete information that how long the popularity leasing cars can remain. Without these information, the argument is logically unacceptable.

Helen.liuUID: 2223898

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. Merely based on unfounded assumption and dubious evidence the memo draws a conclusion that the residents in country of Mohilia should change the focus on leasing car nor purchasing car[作者的结论是针对business 而不是residents]. To support the conclusion, the memo points out the evidence that ten years ago the leasing had risen in popularity. In addition, the memo indicates that the number of people who bought cars are [is] less than the leased drivers. Furthermore, an evidence of surpassing leasing cars will be shown again this year. A careful examination of this argument reveals how groundless it is. There are several critical flaws as follows.

The major problem of the argument is the time. The memo indicates that car leasing became popular ten years ago. This is an obvious wrong correlation with the conclusion. The conditions of ten yars ago cannot tell us that there is a same situation today[最近的情况在题目中也有描述，个人认为主要错误还是过去和现在的情况不能推知未来]. It is possible that the popularity of leasing cars is available to the residents of Mohilia ten years ago, but not the same as today. The rising of the popularity cannot show us that the drivers were preferring leasing cars. Just as some costumes are popular in one season, but people are not likely to try on it.

Also with the above problem, the memo points out that the number of people leasing cars surpassed the number purchasing cars. The memo have [has] not provided more information about today's drivers' opinions. Maybe after the past five years, the residents prefer buying new cars, but not leasing new cars. Even if this tendency can be continued, [觉得这里有一个逻辑错误：题目中说明过去五年中the number of people leasing new cars has surpassed the number buying new cars] the memo has not guaranteed that the whole numbers of people leasing cars is a larger number than people buying new cars. If the memo recommends us to focus on the business of selling cars, they should provide the interests from this business. [这句是要说明什么呢？]Otherwise, we should be very cautious to it.

Except for the above flaws made by the memo, the average age of cars is also a problem. In the memo's opinion, it seems that he wanted to tell us that the leasing car can provide you six years interests. If this is real, then the residents can consider this business. However, the memo has not talked more about this information. Even if the [people’s] interests obtained from the leasing cars can be continued for six years, but the memo can make sure that some accidents can break. [the memo can not make sure that no accidents will break it 或者 the memo should take into account the possible accidents that can break it]For instance, new laws prohibit this behavior or the passion of the residents for leasing cars will decline.

To sum up, the conclusion reached in this argument lacks credibility since the evidence quoted in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the memo maintains. To make it more convincing, the memo would have to provide more specific evidence concerning that the situation with the time-ten years ago is also the same as the today's situation. To better evaluate the argument, we need more concrete information that how long the popularity leasing cars can remain. Without these information, the argument is logically unacceptable.
[这篇我只是列了提纲，所以希望读一读别人的文章，共同探讨一下]
[楼主是否审题的时候有一点错误呢，见我的第一个批注，由于结论是针对business的，所以我觉得可以把profit作为一个反驳的角度]
[我对自己认为逻辑有错误的地方做了一些修改，如果有不妥之处，还请一起讨论]