Argument117 Liquidshile--Hamming组 写太多了练issue习惯了

liquidshileUID: 2254332

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."

最近一次调查超过70％的回应者报告说他们被要求回家完成的工作量比以前多。由于Valu-Mart在过去并没有发现办公用品部销量的显著上升，我们应该利用这种在家办公的趋势，在所有Valu-Mart商店增加家庭办公机器比如打印机、小型复印机、碎纸机和传真机的存货。我们也将增加办公用品比如纸笔和钉书机的存货。通过这些变革，我们办公用品部将会成为我们商店中盈利最多的部门。

WORDS:532 这两天练issue习惯了，废话多没法子！ TIME:42:00
++++++++++++++++++++
1.suvery 调查对象代表性，参与调查的人数比例，调查方式的科学性
2.在家办公多与办公设备的消费增加错误因果
3.即使增多，消费者会购买Valu的商品?
4.草率的结论
++++++++++++++++++++

In this memo, the business manager of Valu-Mart stores recommends that by the way of increasing stock of office supplies and machines Valu-Mart stores’ office-supply departments would be the most profitable component of the store. However, careful scrutiny of the argument reveals various logical problems which render it unconvincing. First, the reliability of the survey cited in the argument is open to doubt. In addition, the author makes a false causal relationship between taking more work home and increasing sales of office supply. Thirdly, the author fails to consider the competition from other stores. Besides, the author makes a hasty conclusion. I will discuss each of these fallacies in turn.

To begin with, the survey that the argument cited is potentially problematic in three respects. First, we are not informed whether these respondents of the survey are representative of all people in every field. Maybe they are the ones who prefer working at home, like SOHO. Second, the survey offers no information about the exact number of people who participate in the survey. Perhaps only a few portion of whole population take part in the survey, the smaller this portion, the less reliable the results. Third, we are not informed the methodology used by the survey. Maybe method adopted is not suitable. In each events, the survey’s results would be unreliable for the purpose of drawing conclusion that working home has been became a new trend.

Even assuming the statistics of the survey cited are reliable, and the working home trend is real phenomenon. The argument relies on another assumption that people who take more work home need many office equipments. Yet, no evidence is provided to substantiate this assumption. It is entirely possible that they only need computer and Internet to process their work, rarely using office machines and supplies. If so, there is no requirement to buy any office machines. Without considering and ruling out this and other alternative possibilities the author cannot convince us that Valu-Mart should increase the stock of the office machines and supplies.

Even if people working at home need office machines, the author also falsely assumes that they who buy these things would choose Valu-Mart stores as the first choice. The argument provides no evidence that this is the case. It is equally possible that people would select other stores whose commodities are cheaper and better quality, whose location are more convenient, and provide better sale-after services. In short, unless the author provides substantiated evidence that Valu-Mart is the first choice for customers, we cannot accept this conclusion.

Moreover, granted that all these changes are effective, we cannot ensure that the office-supply department would become the most profitable component. This conclusion depends on whether office supplement is more profitable than other commodities and the total profit is the largest one. Without more specific information about the Valu-Mart stores we cannot agree the manager’s conclusion.

Overall, this argument, while it seems logical at first glance, has several flaws as discussed above. To strength it the author need provide more information about the survey, the stores and his competitors. It is better for the business manager to collect more comprehensive and exact information before draw the conclusion.

sisong2003UID: 2154005

In this memo, the business manager of Valu-Mart stores recommends that by the way of increasing stock of office supplies and machines Valu-Mart stores’ office-supply departments would be the most profitable component of the store. However, careful scrutiny of the argument reveals various logical problems which render it unconvincing. First, the reliability of the survey cited in the argument is open to doubt. In addition, the author makes a false causal relationship between taking more work home and increasing sales of office supply. Thirdly, the author fails to consider the competition from other stores. Besides, the author makes a hasty conclusion. I will discuss each of these fallacies in turn.

To begin with, the survey that the argument cited is potentially problematic in three respects. First, we are not informed whether these respondents of the survey are representative of all people in every field. Maybe they are the ones who prefer working at home, like SOHO. Second, the survey offers no information about the exact number of people who participate in the survey. Perhaps only a few portion of whole population take part in the survey, the smaller this portion, the less reliable the results. Third, we are not informed the methodology used by the survey. Maybe method adopted is not suitable. In each event, the survey’s results would be unreliable for the purpose of drawing conclusion that working home has been became a new trend.规范标准,论证严密

Even assuming the statistics of the survey cited are reliable, and the working home trend is a real phenomenon. The argument relies on another assumption that people who take more work home need many office equipments. Yet, no evidence is provided to substantiate this assumption. It is entirely possible that they only need computer and Internet to process their work, rarely using office machines and supplies. If so, there is no requirement to buy any office machines. Without considering and ruling out this and other alternative possibilities the author cannot convince us that Valu-Mart should increase the stock of the office machines and supplies.

Even if people working at home need office machines, the author also falsely assumes that they who buy these things would choose Valu-Mart stores as the first choice. The argument provides no evidence that this is the case. It is equally possible that people would select other stores whose commodities are cheaper and with better quality, or whose location are more convenient, and provide better after-sales services. In short, unless the author provides substantiated evidence that Valu-Mart is the first choice for customers, we cannot accept this conclusion.

Moreover, granted that all these changes are effective, we cannot ensure that the office-supply department would become the most profitable component. This conclusion depends on whether office supplement is more profitable than other commodities and the total profit is the largest one. Without more specific information about the Valu-Mart stores we cannot agree to the manager’s conclusion.

Overall, this argument, while it seems logical at first glance, has several flaws as discussed above. To strength it the author need provide more information about the survey, the stores and his competitors. It is better for the business manager to collect more comprehensive and exact information before draw the conclusion.
全文论证严密条理清晰,各种逻辑错误论证方法掌握很好,是一篇Argument的佳作