argument143 4月作文小组3月28日第四次作业 by寂寞樱花

寂寞樱花UID：2306511

TOPIC: ARGUMENT143 - The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.

"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading. The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this impression is contradicted by a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.
WORDS: 400          TIME: 1:16:02          DATE: 2007-3-28

In this argument, the author reaches the conclusion that the article on a national newspaper gives an wrong impression that many competent workers lost their jobs because of downsizing has trapped in serious economic problems. The basis for this conclusion is a report on the United States economy, which contradict with the article. But I find this argument logically unconvincing in several respects.

First of all, the author's conclusion bases on a report on the United States economy, but the author gives out no information about the facticity of the report, and what about the authority of the report. It is possible that the report is only conducted on the basis of a biased sample. If lack of these key information, I will not accept the conclusion.

Second, even if on the assumption that the report is authorized and believable, the author also hastily assumes that more jobs have been created than the ones have been eliminated since 1992 leads to a more employment of the people who lost their jobs. But this aspect is only one of many factors that might affects whether the people who lost their jobs could find a new job. For example, what about the number of population since 1992? Maybe the population has doubled but the creation of jobs has only increased in a small extent. And, even the increase of population is not so quickly as it is in the job increasing, people who lost their jobs may face the problem that they will compete the occupations with the ones graduated just now which have a greater chance to win. If the author cannot rule out these possibilities, the author's claim cannot convince me.

Finally, assuming that many of those who lost their jobs have found new job, but the author fails to give the information about how long have been before these people found a job? It is very possible that these people have used a long time to find jobs which maybe not satisfying for they may not get the two-third jobs that tend to pay above-average wages due to lacking of professional ability and they may face serious economic hardship in the process of finding a job. The overlooking or even failing to consider these possibilities of the author renders the conclusion based upon it highly suspect.

As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer should demonstrate that the report which is the base of the conclusion is believable. Additionally, the arguer must provide more evidence to validate the conclusion.