Argument117 【天下无G askme习作】第15次作业 逻辑，逻辑。。

askmeUID: 2264776

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 625          TIME: 0:29:07          DATE: 2007-2-21


Giving some facts and analysis, the argument that Valu-Mart stores will gain a profit with office-supply seems logical. However, a careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

To begin with, the argument simply depends on the survey that over 70 percent of the respondents are required to take more work home. However, this survey is too vague to be informative. First, we are not informed how many people were surveyed but did not respond. If, for instance, 500 subjects were studied, but no more than 50 echoed, thus the result is highly unconvincing. In addition, we find no sign of such procedure for random sampling, thus doubting whether the sample is representative enough to reflect the general situation of people as a whole. In fact, if the sample is limited to a certain persons, such as software developers, it is natural that most of them are required to take work home because their work can be completed in their own computers. Yet, there are much more people, such as engineers, repair workers, cannot take their work home. Thereupon, lacking such evidence, the survey is beyond reliability.

Furthermore, even if the survey is reliable, it does not follow that Valu-Mart stores should store office machines, for the reason that these things might be useless to people working home. It is highly possible that people, who take work home, only do some simple things, such as proofread, debug some programme, and prepare speech next day. If so, it is unnecessary for them to buy any new equipment, let alone these expensive office machines. What's more, even if they need these machines sometimes, if these machines are too expensive to afford, they might forgo the idea to buy them and bring some work, which requires these machines, to offices. In short, any of these scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the conclusion that Valu-Mart stores should increase the stock of home office machines.

Next, even granted that people need these office machines as well as other office supplies, such as paper, the argument falsely rests on the assumption that the present supply cannot meet the demand. However, this is not the case, nor does the arguer provide any evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. It is equally possible that compared to the supply, the demand in market is quite small. Even faced the increase in the number of people who take work home, the demand might still pale in comparison with the supply. If Valu-Mart stores continue to increase the stock, it will follow that the supply exceeds the demand, which might devalue the products. As a result, the stores will not necessarily earn a profit.

Finally, even assuming that the demand is over the supply now, the arguer provides no evidence that people will certainly buy products from Valu-Mart stores. As common sense and experience tells us that a variety of factors, such price, quality, and advertisement, might also play important roles. Are these products are more expensive than those in other stores? Or does the quality of them satisfy consumers? Or is there enough advertisement to let people know such outstanding products? All of these would exert profound influence on the sales of these products, which, in turn, affect the profit. In a word, without ruling out these and other possible factors, the arguer cannot draw any reliable conclusion.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited here lends no strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen this argument, the arguer should provide more evidence regarding the reliability of the survey. To better evaluate this argument, we need more information about demand, supply and other costs.

lindorUID: 2290025

Giving some facts and analysis, the argument that Valu-Mart stores will gain a profit with office-supply seems logical. However, a careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
开头很concise。
To begin with, the argument simply depends on the survey that over 70 percent of the respondents are required to take more work home. However, this survey is too vague to be informative. First, we are not informed how many people were surveyed but did not respond. If, for instance, 500 subjects were studied, but no more than 50 echoed, thus the result is highly unconvincing. In addition, we find no sign of such procedure for random sampling, thus doubting whether the sample is representative enough to reflect the general situation of people as a whole. In fact, if the sample is limited to a certain persons, such as software developers, it is natural that most of them are required to take work home because their work can be completed in their own computers. Yet, there are much more people, such as engineers, repair workers, cannot take their work home. Thereupon, lacking such evidence, the survey is beyond reliability.
good。不错。survey的错误。
Furthermore, even if the survey is reliable, it does not follow that Valu-Mart stores should store office machines, for the reason that these things might be useless to people working home. It is highly possible that people, who take work home, only do some simple things, such as proofread, debug some programs, and prepare speech next day. If so, it is unnecessary for them to buy any new equipment, let alone these expensive office machines. What's more, even if they need these machines sometimes, if these machines are too expensive to afford, they might forgo the idea to buy them and bring some work, which requires these machines, to offices. In short, any of these scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the conclusion that Valu-Mart stores should increase the stock of home office machines.
这一段分析得很好，我把这个点放到survey的问题里面去了，确实是个逻辑失误。
Next, even granted that people need these office machines as well as other office supplies, such as paper, the argument falsely rests on the assumption that the present supply cannot meet the demand. However, this is not the case, nor does the arguer provide any evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. It is equally possible that compared to the supply, the demand in market is quite small. Even faced the increase in the number of people who take work home, the demand might still pale in comparison with the supply. If Valu-Mart stores continue to increase the stock, it will follow that the supply exceeds the demand, which might devalue the products. As a result, the stores will not necessarily earn a profit.
供求关系。
Finally, even assuming that the demand is over the supply now, the arguer provides no evidence that people will certainly buy products from Valu-Mart stores. As common sense and experience tells us that a variety of factors, such price, quality, and advertisement, might also play important roles. Are these products are more expensive than those in other stores? Or does the quality of them satisfy consumers? Or is there enough advertisement to let people know such outstanding products? All of these would exert profound influence on the sales of these products, which, in turn, affect the profit. In a word, without ruling out these and other possible factors, the arguer cannot draw any reliable conclusion.
市场竞争因素。
To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited here lends no strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen this argument, the arguer should provide more evidence regarding the reliability of the survey. To better evaluate this argument, we need more information about demand, supply and other costs.
这个argument就写得很好了～，coverage广，语言，句式变化上都很不错。6分。

yosi19841208UID: 2297493

提个小小建议：）
每段的开头都有个even
是为了层层递进吧，应该可以有更好的提换的单词吧：）