Argument117 【Persistence 小组】第十二次作业，欢迎猛批

欣馨之火UID: 2183210

117. 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."



In this memo, the manager draws a conclusion that the office-supply department of Valu-Mart will become most profitable component of their stores by increasing the stock of home office machines and supplies. To support this statement, the manager cites a survey to which most respondents reported that they are required take more work home than ever before, and the memo still mentions some analysis based on the survey. Close scrutiny of the survey and the analysis, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the conclusion.

First of all, no evidence support that the demand of office machines and supplies increased. The result of the survey does not necessarily indicate that people who have to take more work home will purchase more office machines and supplies. Perhaps they have enough office supplies, or even perhaps they just take the work, which do not need paper, pens, or printers, back home. For those matters, the increase of sales of office machines and supplies is doubtful, and therefore that the profits of office-supply departments are more than other component is unconvincing.

Secondly, the manager fails to justify that the respondents to the survey can represent the potential customers of the office supplies. We have information about neither the purpose of the survey nor the respondents' age and careers. It is entirely possible that the survey was only designed to find out degree of satisfaction of one special career, or the respondents to the survey are limited in small groups, thus the survey and its results have nothing to do with the sales, or profits, of office supplies, and the work-at-home trend is unsubstantiated.

Thirdly, even if the respondents to the survey are representative and the work-at-home trend is substantiated, the manager still hastily concludes that the profits of office-supply departments will be the highest one by increasing the stock. As we all know, besides the stock, the sales of a kind of merchandise relate to many factors, such as qualities, price and after-sale-service. Simply increasing the stock does not mean that the sales will increase. Hence, the profits, which are deeply influenced by the sales, are uncertain.

Furthermore, even if the profits of office supplies would increase, no evidence support that the profits of other component of the stores are less than that of office-supply departments. If the markets and sales of other components are much better than those of the office-supply departments and other components earn more profits, we can indefinitely anticipate the office-supply departments to be the most profitable component.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the manager has to give more information about the demand of the home office machines and supplies, at the same time, further study of the survey and the respondents' attitudes toward the supplies is needed. Meanwhile, we need to get more information about the sales and profits of other components of their stores.

vinnieUID: 2104933

Argument117 【Persistence 小组】第十二次作业，欢迎猛批
117. 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."



In this memo, the manager draws a conclusion that the office-supply department of Valu-Mart will become (the) most profitable component of their stores by increasing the stock of home office machines and supplies. To support this statement, the manager cites a survey to which most respondents reported that they are required (to) take more work home than ever before, and the memo still mentions some analysis based on the survey. Close scrutiny of the survey and the analysis, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the conclusion.

First of all, no evidence support(s) that the demand of office machines and supplies increased. The result of the survey does not necessarily indicate that people who have to take more work home will purchase more office machines and supplies. Perhaps they have enough office supplies, or even perhaps they just take the work, which do not need paper, pens, or printers, back home. For those matters, the increase of sales of office machines and supplies is doubtful, and therefore that the profits of office-supply departments are more than other component is unconvincing.

Secondly, the manager fails to justify that the respondents to the survey can represent the potential customers of the office supplies. We have (no,后面用both…and)information about neither the purpose of the survey nor the respondents' age and careers. It is entirely possible that the survey was only designed to find out degree of satisfaction of one special career, or the respondents to the survey are limited in small groups, thus the survey and its results have nothing to do with the sales, or profits, of office supplies, and the work-at-home trend is unsubstantiated.

Thirdly, even if the respondents to the survey are representative and the work-at-home trend is substantiated, the manager still hastily concludes that the profits of office-supply departments will be the highest one by increasing the stock. As we all know, besides the stock, the sales of a kind of merchandise relate to many factors, such as qualities, price and after-sale-service. Simply increasing the stock does not mean that the sales will increase. Hence, the profits, which are deeply influenced by the sales, are uncertain.

Furthermore, even if the profits of office supplies would increase, no evidence support(s) that the profits of other component of the stores are less than that of office-supply departments. If the markets and sales of other components are much better than those of the office-supply departments and other components earn more profits, we can indefinitely anticipate the office-supply departments to be the most profitable component.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the manager has to give more information about the demand of the home office machines and supplies, at the same time, further study of the survey and the respondents' attitudes toward the supplies is needed. Meanwhile, we need to get more information about the sales and profits of other components of their stores.
这篇文章本身没什么问题，但是就象上次妞妞改我垃圾处理的ARGUE的，叫我去看‘ARGUMENT就应该这样写’的这篇文章，我觉得有些问题是共通的，就是攻击点没抓住要害，总是在些比较细小的问题上批驳。象这次的五个批驳点，最后那个可以成为利润最高的，是有问题，但是如果现实中有人对你说这样的话，我们会觉得这是合理的，所以我想这篇文章可以讨论下，我也没想到一个特别致命的要害