Argument17 四海一家 第二次作业 多谢赐教

dream191919UID: 2245981

Argument 17 The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ—which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks—has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."


In this argument, the arguer concludes that Walnut Grove’s town council should continue using EZ Disposal. To support this conclusion, the arguer points out that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ—which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks—has ordered additional trucks. In addition, the arguer reasons that  80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance. However, this argument suffers several critical fallacies.

First, from this argument, we cannot find the direct relationship between the times of collect trash and good trash collection services. In another word , the times of collecting trash of EZ cannot stand for the good services . It is entirely possible that the EZ collected trash twice a week just because their collection ability is not advanced.

Second, the author fail to establish the relationship between the amount of trucks and the quality of services, so it cannot convince us that more trucks contributes good services. As we all know, truck can be used in many other areas not just in the process of transport stuff. We will never know whether all the trucks EZ buy will be use in the trash collection activity. Moreover, the type of the trucks, the ability of transport and speed, EZ ordered should be taken into account, but this important information is lacking in this argument.

Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary to point out another flaw in the argument. 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 attitudes of all the service receivers as a whole. Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual reason of why EZ is better.

In conclusion, the arguer didn’t offer adequate information to convince us to chose the trash collection services. Therefore, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of final decision of which company to chose must be based on more thorough investigation to gather sufficient data in order to narrow down and locate the actual causes of the problem. Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual solution of the decision.

slxUID: 2295449

In this argument, the arguer concludes that Walnut Grove’s town council should continue using EZ Disposal. To support this conclusion, the arguer points out that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ—which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks—has ordered additional trucks. In addition, the arguer reasons that  80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance. However, this argument suffers several critical fallacies.

First, from this argument, we cannot find the direct relationship between the times of collect trash用名词形式吧 and good trash collection services. In another word , the times of collecting trash of EZ cannot stand for the good services . It is entirely possible that the EZ collected trash twice a week just because their collection ability is not advanced.

Second, the author fail to establish the relationship between the amount of trucks and the quality of services, so it cannot convince us that more trucks contributes 复数to good services. As we all know, truck can be used in many other areas not just in the process of transport stuff. We will never know whether all the trucks EZ buy will be use in the trash collection activity. Moreover, the type of the trucks, the ability of transport and speed, EZ ordered should be taken into account, but this important information is lacking in this argument.

Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary to point out another flaw in the argument. 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 attitudes of all the service receivers as a whole. Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual reason of why EZ is better.

In conclusion, the arguer didn’t offer adequate information to convince us to chose the trash collection services. Therefore, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of final decision of which company to chose must be based on more thorough investigation to gather sufficient data in order to narrow down and locate the actual causes of the problem. Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual solution of the decision.

头尾太大，主体反而过于简略了，感觉模板的成分过多，有效地分析内容被削弱了很多，攻击的力度不太够

[ 本帖最后由 slx 于 2007-2-5 13:31 编辑 ]

dream191919UID: 2245981

好