Argument117 [smile小组]-第6次作业 请各位不吝赐教

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

Argument117
The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.
"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores."

Outline
逻辑线：study-------->work-at-home-trend-------->profit---------->most profitable component
1 Firstly, the arguer unfairly underestimates the profiting ability of other departments in the store.
2 Another fallacy the arguer has committed is that, he assumes work-at-home trend would inevitably leads to large profit at office-supply component.
3 Further more, the arguer has provided us a vague study in which 70 percent of respondents said they took more work home.

In this argument, the arguer firstly states that there would be a work-at-home trend in a later future on the basis of a study, in which 70 percent of respondents concede they would work home more than the past. Then by increasing store of home office articles, he or she establishes the conclusion that office-supply departments would become the most profitable component in the store. However, careful examination would tell us there are some fallacies in this argument.

Firstly, the arguer unfairly underestimates the profiting ability of other departments in the store. In this argument, only one department, the office-supply department was mentioned with insufficient information. This mere fact can not give enough credibility of the arguer's 'most profitable department'. It is likely that the closing department, which is often, if not always, the most busy and therefore possible most profitable unit, would make more profit than that of the office-supply component. It is also likely that other departments say food department earning money every day would surpass the office-supply component in profit. Without ruling factors like these, the arguer can not make his or her conclusion of 'most profitable component' hastily.

Another fallacy the arguer has committed is that, he assumes work-at-home trend would inevitably leads to large profit at office-supply component. As far as profit is concerned, it is really a complex thing to discuss as result of many possible influencing factors. It is possible that people who would work at home  would never buy few, if any, office articles, because the work they done at home is mostly related with reading documents, sending emails, checking reports and something like that. It is equally possible that, there may be other strong competitive store existed in the same region. If so, the profitability would also be undermined greatly.

Further more, the arguer has provided us a vague study in which 70 percent of respondents said they took more work home. With not any detail information like, how this study was conducted, what the sample size was, and how many subject responded, we are inclined to suspect the credibility of this study. If the study was conducted only in a given region and with a small sample size say 100, and only 60 responded, the study would never be a representative of a general situation. In this case, the result of this study--work-at-home trend-- would not be tenable.  

In conclusion, this argument is incredible, for the study and the facts mentioned by the arguer can not lend strong support to its conclusion. For a more convincing argument, the arguer has to provide information about both the situation of other departments in his or her store and the details of the study.

dychangfengUID: 2216148

Argument117
The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.
"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores."

Outline
逻辑线：study-------->work-at-home-trend-------->profit---------->most profitable component
1 Firstly, the arguer unfairly underestimates the profiting ability of other departments in the store.
2 Another fallacy the arguer has committed is that, he assumes work-at-home trend would inevitably leads to large profit at office-supply component.
3 Further more, the arguer has provided us a vague study in which 70 percent of respondents said they took more work home.

In this argument, the arguer firstly states that there would be a work-at-home trend in a later future on the basis of a study, in which 70 percent of respondents concede they would work home more than the past. Then by increasing store of home office articles, he or she establishes the conclusion that office-supply departments would become the most profitable component in the store. However, careful examination would tell us there are some fallacies in this argument.

Firstly, the arguer unfairly underestimates the profiting ability of other departments in the store. In this argument, only one department, the office-supply department was mentioned with insufficient information. This mere fact can not give enough credibility of the arguer's 'most profitable department'. It is likely that the closing department, which is often, if not always, the most busy and therefore possible most profitable unit, would make more profit than that of the office-supply component.(这个句子好） It is also likely that other departments say food department earning money every day would surpass the office-supply component in profit. Without ruling factors like these, the arguer can not make his or her conclusion of 'most profitable component' hastily. （这种情况下用缺少相关信息来表述感觉会好些）
Another fallacy the arguer has committed is that, he assumes work-at-home trend would inevitably leads to large profit at office-supply component. As far as profit is concerned, it is really a complex thing to discuss as result of many possible influencing factors. It is possible that people who would work at home  would never buy few, if any, office articles, because the work they done at home is mostly related with reading documents, sending emails, checking reports and something like that(这句话展开的好）. It is equally possible that, there may be other strong competitive store existed in the same region. If so, the profitability would also be undermined greatly. （这个判断有些武断，有竞争利润不一定会下降）

Further more, the arguer has provided us a vague study in which 70 percent of respondents said they took more work home. With not any detail information like, how this study was conducted, what the sample size was, and how many subject responded, we are inclined to suspect the credibility of this study. If the study was conducted only in a given region and with a small sample size say 100, and only 60 responded, the study would never be a representative of a general situation. In this case, the result of this study--work-at-home trend-- would not be tenable.  

In conclusion, this argument is incredible, for the study and the facts mentioned by the arguer can not lend strong support to its conclusion. For a more convincing argument, the arguer has to provide information about both the situation of other departments in his or her store (and other similar companies) and the details of the study.

Congratulations! 这篇文章已经相当成熟了，按照这个趋势形成自己的风格，使肯定可以拿高分的:victory: 加油！

建议再研究一下ets例文，这样在开头结尾及结构方面都会有很大启发，也好应付考场上的突变。

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

谢谢
好的，我下来研究ETS的范文再修改

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

Argument117
The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.
"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores."

Outline
1 Firstly, the arguer unfairly underestimates the profiting ability of other departments in the store.
2 Another fallacy the arguer has committed is that, he assumes work-at-home trend would inevitably leads to large profit at office-supply component.
3 Further more, the arguer has provided us a vague study in which 70 percent of respondents said they took more work home.

In this argument, the arguer firstly states that there would be a work-at-home trend in a later future on the basis of a study, in which 70 percent of respondents concede they would work home more than the past. Then by increasing store of home office articles, he or she establishes the conclusion that office-supply departments would become the most profitable component in the store. However, careful examination would tell us there are some fallacies in this argument.

Firstly, the arguer unfairly underestimates the profiting ability of other departments in the store. In this argument, only one department, the office-supply department was mentioned with insufficient information. This mere fact can not give enough credibility of the arguer's 'most profitable department'. It is likely that the closing department, which is often, if not always, the most busy and therefore possible most profitable unit, would make more profit than that of the office-supply component. It is also likely that other departments say food department earning money every day would surpass the office-supply component in profit. Without information about other departments, the arguer can not make his or her conclusion of 'most profitable component' hastily.

Another fallacy the arguer has committed is that, he assumes work-at-home trend would inevitably leads to large profit at office-supply component. As far as profit is concerned, it is really a complex thing to discuss as result of many possible influencing factors. It is possible that people who would work at home  would never buy few, if any, office articles, because the work they done at home is mostly related with reading documents, sending emails, checking reports and something like that. It is equally possible that, there may be other strong competitive store existed in the same region. If so, the profitability may also be undermined greatly.

Further more, the arguer has provided us a vague study in which 70 percent of respondents said they took more work home. With not any detail information like, how this study was conducted, what the sample size was, and how many subject responded, we are inclined to suspect the credibility of this study. If the study was conducted only in a given region and with a small sample size say 100, and only 60 responded, the study would never be a representative of a general situation. In this case, the result of this study—work-at-home trend—would not be tenable.  

In conclusion, this argument is incredible, for the study and the facts mentioned by the arguer can not lend strong support to its conclusion. For a more convincing argument, the arguer has to provide information about both the situation of other departments in his/her store and other similar companies and the details of the study.