argument179

PrudenceUID: 2286952

TOPIC: ARGUMENT179 - The following is a memorandum written by the director of personnel to the president of the Cedar Corporation.

"It would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year. It is the second most expensive caterer in the city. In addition, its prices have risen in each of the last three years, and it refuses to provide meals for people on special diets. Just last month three employees complained to me that they no longer eat in the cafeteria because they find the experience 'unbearable.' Our company should instead hire Discount Foods. Discount is a family-owned local company and it offers a varied menu of fish and poultry. I recently tasted a sample lunch at one of the many companies that Discount serves and it was delicious-an indication that hiring Discount will lead to improved employee satisfaction."
WORDS: 434          TIME: 0:40:00          DATE: 2007-3-29

The arguer indicates that it would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company (GTC) to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year with a series of evidence, and claims that we should hire Discount Foods (DF). However, further scrutiny examination of this argument, reveals several flaws making itself unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the arthor fails to provide sufficient evidences to substantiate that we should not hire GTC again. First, maybe there are only two food companies in the location, and the other one is DF with a higher food price. Second, the increasing prices of food of GTC in each of the last three years have something to do with the price increase of meat,  vegetables, and the like. And at the same time the sallary of employees is increasing too. Third, without telling us what the three employees experience, it is entirely possible that this experence has nothing to do with GTC.  Perhaps, a stealor steals their wallets in cafeteria. Accordingly, the author fails to provide all these necessary informations, which renders the claim that we should not hire GTC unpersuasive at all.

Even if the author can provide more information to substantiate that we should not hire GTC again, it is presumptuous for the author to assert that we should hire DF. First, the stature of a family-owned local company and the service of offering a varied menu of fish and poultry cannot persuade me that DF does better than GTC about food service.  Second, a sample lunch tastes good does not reflect that all foods DF supplied to employees are delicious too, which is common in my observation. The author should supply a comparison, which shows DF is better than GTC on food service, between them to persuade me. However, the author fails to do so.

Moreover, it is presumptuous for the arthor to get the conclusion that hiring DF will lead to improved employee satifaction. No one can foresee what will happen in the future. Maybe DF's food service is totally worse than GTC's, although the sample lunch is delicious. Thus, the author cannot convince me in this recpect.

Furthermore, I wonder whether there are some other food company, of which maybe some are better than both of GTC and FG. Concerning the important role of the food company towards their employees' health , I suggest that the author should do a thorough survey about all food companies, on which based to get a more reasonable conclusion.

To sum up, the author fails to make the recommendation convincing, and need to supply more details.

PrudenceUID: 2286952

提纲：
1）不再雇用GTC证据不足
2）雇用DF理由不够
3）即使有理由证明以上的，也没有理由说未来员工满意度高
4）有没有其他的公司更合适？

PrudenceUID: 2286952

:loveliness:

The arguer indicates that it would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company (GTC) to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year with a series of evidence, and claims that we should hire Discount Foods (DF). However, further scrutiny examination of this argument, reveals several flaws making itself unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the author fails to provide sufficient evidences to substantiate that we should not hire GTC again. First, maybe there are only two food companies in the location, and the other one is DF with a higher food price. Besides, in my observation higher price often means better service, this regulation also can be applied in the foods service.Second, the increasing prices of food of GTC in each of the last three years, from which it seems that this company makes great profits,however,have nothing to do with great profits but has everything to so withthe price increase of meat, vegetables, and the like. And maybeat the same time the salary of employees is increasing too. Third, without telling us what the three employees experience, it is entirely possible that this “unbearable” experience has nothing to do with GTC.  Perhaps, a stealer steals their wallets in cafeteria, which results in their dissatisfaction about the security of the caterer, and they no longer eat here. Accordingly, the author fails to provide all these necessary information, which renders the claim that we should not hire GTC unpersuasive at all.

Even if the author can provide more information to substantiate that we should not hire GTC again, it is presumptuous for the author to assert that we should hire DF. First, the stature of a family-owned local company and the service of offering a varied menu of fish and poultry cannot persuade me that DF does better than GTC about food service. Second, the mere fact that a sample lunch tastes good does not reflect that all foods DF supplied to employees are delicious too, which is common in my observation. After all, in order to be employed to earn money, most companies including DF would pay more attention to the samples than their ordinary supply. Consequently, the author should supply a comparison, which shows DF is better than GTC on food service, between them to persuade me. However, the author fails to do so.

Moreover, it is presumptuous for the author to get the conclusion that hiring DF will lead to improved employee satisfaction. No one can foresee what will happen in the future. Maybe DF's food service is totally worse than GTC's, although the sample lunch is delicious. Thus, the author cannot convince me in this respect.

Furthermore, I wonder whether there are some other food company, of which maybe some are better than both of GTC and FG. Concerning the important role of the food company towards their employees' health, I suggest that the author should do a thorough survey about all food companies, on which based to get a more reasonable conclusion.

To sum up, there is so little information provided that the author fails to make the recommendation convincing. Thus,in order to make the recommendation persuasive, the author needs to supply more details.

[ 本帖最后由 Prudence 于 2007-3-30 13:02 编辑 ]

zsa1983UID: 2299564

The arguer indicates that it would be a mistake to rehire the Good-Taste Company (GTC) to supply the food in our employee cafeteria next year with a series of evidence, and claims that we should hire Discount Foods (DF). However, further scrutiny // examination(两个要一个就可以了)  of this argument, reveals several flaws making itself unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the author fails to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate that we should not hire GTC again. First, maybe there are only two food companies in the location, and the other one is DF with a higher food price. Second, the increasing prices of food of GTC in each of the last three years have something to do with the price increase of meat, vegetables, and the like. And at the same time the salary of employees is increasing too. (这个假设非常好)Third, without telling us what the three employees experience, it is entirely possible that this experience has nothing to do with GTC.  Perhaps, a stealer steals their wallets in cafeteria. Accordingly, the author fails to provide all these necessary information, which renders the claim that we should not hire GTC unpersuasive at all.

Even if the author can provide more information to substantiate that we should not hire GTC again, it is presumptuous for the author to assert that we should hire DF. First, the stature of a family-owned local company and the service of offering a varied menu of fish and poultry cannot persuade me that DF does better than GTC about food service.  Second, a sample lunch tastes good does not reflect that all foods DF supplied to employees are delicious too, which is common in my observation. The author should supply a comparison, which shows DF is better than GTC on food service, between them to persuade me. However, the author fails to do so.

Moreover, it is presumptuous for the author to get the conclusion that hiring DF will lead to improved employee satisfaction. No one can foresee what will happen in the future. Maybe DF's food service is totally worse than GTC's, although the sample lunch is delicious. Thus, the author cannot convince me in this respect.

Furthermore, I wonder whether there are some other food company, of which maybe some are better than both of GTC and FG. Concerning the important role of the food company towards their employees' health , I suggest that the author should do a thorough survey about all food companies, on which based to get a more reasonable conclusion.

To sum up, the author fails to make the recommendation convincing, and need to supply more details.呵呵有点短

感觉论述的非常有条理,佩服哦
学习了,呵呵,我论证的时候经常找不到切入点