Argument226 -求拍- 6月作文小组4月12日第一次作业 by Nianliu413100

nianliu413100UID: 2211729

argument 226
The following appeared as part of a memo from the manager of an automobile manufacturing company.
"Because the demand for our automobiles is expected to increase dramatically, we need to open a new manufacturing plant as soon as possible in order to continue to thrive. Our marketing projections indicate that 80 million people will want to buy our automobiles, yet our existing plant can only produce 40 million automobiles. The new plant can be opened on a part-time basis, with workers from our existing site rotating responsibilities, until an operational staff can be trained. A major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this part-time rotating strategy when it opened its new plant five years ago."
提纲：
1. 主题句，著者结论是两点，1. 2. 其中1.论据是定单上升， 2. 是飞机厂这么做
2. 定上升的 结论 的支持信息不充分。 且不一定可靠。这个调查谁作的， 如何操作。面多宽。 放映真实内心没或实际情况没。
3. 错误的类比。
4. 错误假设， 新开厂就能保持繁荣？ 别的厂也可以加入竞争。
5.  终极
正文：
In this argument, the author concludes that in order to continue to thrive,our company need to open a new plant as soon as possible. At first glance, the author's reasoning seems to be appealing, while clearly examining the author's reasoning process, we may find that it is unconvincing. This arugument contains several facets that questionable.
First of all,in order to support the conclusion, the author point out that "our marketing projections indicate that 80 millions people will want to buy our automobiles". Common sense tell us that, while to evalutate a survey, one must consider some factors should be taken into account. Such as: 1. who conduct this survey? 2. How this survey be conducted? 3.How broaden this survey is? 4.Whether the respondents experss their realistic mind?  The survey maybe conducted by the market department of the author's company, therefore it is convinving. Maybe, respondents want to buy automobiles but they can not affort it. It is obvious that the author's evidenc is insufficent to support the conclusion.  
In the second place, the author makes an over simple analogy between that the part-time ratating strategy in a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful and that the part-time ratating strategy will also successful in our automobiles. It is obviously unwarrented for the simple reason that one thing will rarely remains the same from one field to another field. The part-time ratating strategy in a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful, however it maybe do not suit for the our company. Unless the author could provide more perservarsive informations and rule out the possiblility.   
Last but not the least, the author commits "cause and effect" fallicy. The asssumption that opening a new manufacturer plant necessay led to our company will continue to thrive is unwarrented. It is highly possible that other companys will open new plant. If many companys share the market with us, It is highly possible we will not continue to thrive. So, the author make harssty conclusion.
To sum up, I can concludes that the author's reaoning process is illogic and the author's conlusion is unwarrented. In order to support the conlusion, the author should provide more persivasive information and make the reasoning logical.