argument117 <米国有米寒假作业 2.1 第五天〉

blackswitchUID: 2110679

"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."
In this argument, the arguer suggests that  Valu-Mart(VM) should  increase the stock of home office machines and office supplies in their all stores .However, the argument is lack of credibility due to the following fallacies.
To begin with, the result of this survey might be problematic in several aspects: Firstly, the arguer fails to inform us that which people consist with the respondents? As we all know, the total number of the respondents, their ages, their sex, their work type and so on would influence the reliability of this survey. For instance, a majority of respondents are below 30 years old, in this case,  given that young man usually are allocated more work than other old man , survey is not representative . In addition, when most of respondents are software engineer, compared with other people, they may have more possibility to work at home. In short, without this information, the arguer cannot convince me that the survey’s result correctly reflects the general truth.
The second fallacy of the argument is that even if assuming that the survey is statistically reliable, the arguer still fails to convince us that there will be increasing demand of office machines and supplies. The arguer unfairly equates those who are investigated with customers of VM. It is quite possible that they bring office machines and supplies from their companies. And also, even if they are likely to buy new office machines and supplies, they may still buy office machines and supplies from other stores rather than VM. Without ruling out the foregoing possibilities, the argument is in short of legitimacy.
The last but not least flaw of the argument is that the arguer draws a hasty conclusion that by stocking more office machines and supplies office-supply department will become the most profitable component of the stores. Even if assuming there will be increasing demand of office commodities of VM, there is no evidence that cost of buying office machines and supplies and cost of the transporting those supplies to stores will remain the same or decline. Therefore, it is entirely possible that profits will not increase. Moreover, without comparison with other departments of VM, the arguer cannot declare that office-supply department will be the most profitable one.
To sum up, due to the foregoing flaws the argument is logically unacceptable.

pipifenfenUID: 2292582

In this argument, the arguer suggests that  Valu-Mart(VM) should  increase the stock of home office machines and office supplies in their all stores .However, the argument is lack of credibility due to the following fallacies.
To begin with, the result of this survey might be problematic in several aspects: Firstly, the arguer fails to inform us that [which people哪一个人？][改为fails to inform us the information about the respondents是不是好一点？] consist with the respondents? As we all know,[ the total number of the respondents, their ages, their sex, their work type and so on] [the number, the age, the sex and the work of respondents all]would influence the reliability of this survey. For instance, [perhaps]a majority of respondents are below 30 years old, [in this case,多于]  given that young man usually are allocated more work than [other前面没有提老人，哪里来的other] old man , survey is not representative . In addition, [if][when] most of respondents are software engineer, compared with other people, they may have more possibility[用复数] to work at home. In short, without this information, the arguer cannot convince me that the survey’s result correctly reflects the general truth.
The second fallacy of the argument is that even if assuming that the survey is statistically reliable, the arguer still fails to convince us that there will be increasing demand of office machines and supplies. The arguer unfairly equates those who are investigated with customers of VM. It is quite possible that they bring office machines and supplies from their companies. And also, even if they are likely to buy new office machines and supplies, they may still[前面没有提过去就在别的商店买，何来仍然？] buy office machines and supplies from other stores rather than VM. Without ruling out the foregoing possibilities, the argument is in short of legitimacy.
The last but not least flaw of the argument is that the arguer draws a hasty conclusion that by stocking more office machines and supplies office-supply department will become the most profitable component of the stores. Even if assuming there will be [an]increasing demand of office commodities of VM, there is no evidence that cost of buying office machines and supplies and cost of the transporting those supplies to stores will remain the same or decline. Therefore, it is entirely possible that profits will not increase. Moreover, without comparison with other departments of VM, the arguer cannot declare that office-supply department will be the most profitable one. [没有和其他商店比较，太笼统，可以具体点，比如说其他顾客可能去竞争者那里]
To sum up, due to the foregoing flaws the argument is logically unacceptable.[结尾太简单]
字数有点少，结尾过于简单。