argument180 【米国有米】寒假作业第23天2－20

holdingUID: 2285054

TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
WORDS: 458          TIME: 0:24:55          DATE: 2007-2-20

The seemingly persuasive argument claims that Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read by the evidence that many other companies greatly improved productivity by having their employees take the Easy Read Speed Course. And as the conclusion of author, this will be a benefit which costs little. It seems that the argument is persuasive, but after carefully research we would find out several mistakes which could weaken the argument to be not suggested.

In the first place of analysis, the arguer analogizes the result of the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course too hasty. Firstly, the result of this course may not efficient as the auger claims. It is possible that the two graduate of the course which do good are excellent without the course as well or they take in part of other courses at the same time. And the arguer only cites two of the all graduate as evidence, which is lacking of reasoning, because the two of all could be coincide. Also, and most important, the other companies' condition would be different with the one of Acme Publishing Company. It is possible that Acme do not need the employees have excellent reading ability. Therefore, the spending on the course will become a kind of waste.

In the second place of analysis, the arguer fails to establish the causal relationship between the faster speed of reading and the amount of information absorbing. As we all know, the situation of absorbing information in a single workday is also related to the employees' ability of understanding and remembering. The arguer neglects these two vital elements of influence. It is possible that although the employees have high level of reading speed, they could not remember and absorb more information than the one who has not take the course at all while has other excellence.

Besides, the arguer concludes the conclusion hasty without consideration of other elements of the development of the company. Firstly, not all the employees should have this course as not all of they should have good ability of absorbing information, although the course could really improve this ability. If the company let all of their employees to take the Easy Read, it would cost too much as the large number of the whole employees although each person cost small. In this case, it would become a kind of waste of money which may be needed in other ways.

To sum up, the argument is unsound at all because of lacking of more persuasive evidence and reasoning process of proving. If the author wants to persuade more people, he should provide more evidence which could substantiatethe course is suitable to all employees and would be beneficial to the company with little cost.

blackswitchUID: 2110679

argument180 【米国有米】寒假作业第23天2－20
TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
WORDS: 458          TIME: 0:24:55          DATE: 2007-2-20

The seemingly persuasive argument claims that Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read by the evidence that many other companies greatly improved productivity by having their employees take the Easy Read Speed Course. And as the conclusion of author, this will be a benefit which costs little. It seems that the argument is persuasive, but after carefully research we would find out several mistakes which could weaken the argument to be not suggested.

In the first place of analysis, the arguer analogizes the result of the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course too hasty. Firstly, the result of this course may not efficient as the auger claims. It is possible that the two graduate of the course which do good are excellent without the course as well or they take in part of other courses at the same time. And the arguer only cites two of the all graduate as evidence, which is lacking of reasoning, because the two of all could be coincide. Also, and most important, the other companies' condition would be different with the one of Acme Publishing Company. It is possible that Acme do not need the employees whohave excellent reading ability. Therefore, the spending on the course will become a kind of waste.

In the second place of analysis, the arguer fails to establish the causal relationship between the faster speed of reading and the amount of information absorbing. As we all know, the situation of absorbing information in a single workday is also related to the employees' ability of understanding and remembering. The arguer neglects these two vital elements of influence. It is possible that although the employees have high level of reading speed, they could not remember and absorb more information than the one who has not take the course at all while has other excellence. 这段的攻击点比较单薄
Besides, the arguer concludes the conclusion hasty without consideration of other elements of the development of the company. Firstly, not all the employees should have this course as not all of they should have good ability of absorbing information, although the course could really improve this ability. If the company let all of their employees to take the Easy Read, it would cost too much as the large number of the whole employees although each person cost small。In this case, it would become a kind of waste of money which may be needed in other ways.

To sum up, the argument is unsound at all because of lacking of more persuasive evidence and reasoning process of proving. If the author wants to persuade more people, he should provide more evidence which could substantiatethe course is suitable to all employees and would be beneficial to the company with little cost.
从论证结构上来说，作者已经掌握地很好的，但是对题目的分析还可以再深入一些