Argument117 [Victors小组]第八次作业

乳虎UID: 2251211

117The 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

提纲：1作者武断地认为有一个work-at-home trend。
      2作者错误地假设 home office machines 的需求会增加。
      3作者武断的认为增加the stock of home office machines会使office-supply departments变成最盈利的部门。

In this argument， the arguer quotes a survey showing that over 70 percent of the respondents reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. On the basis, the arguer recommend that Valu-Mart increase at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders and fax machines. In addition he or she advises Valu-Mart stores to increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. Additionally, he or she claims that with those changes, Valu-Mart's office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of Valu-Mart. In my view, the argument commits a series of logical flaws, which makes the argument not convincing.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that there is a universal work-at-home trend. However, mere the survey tells little about the so-called work-at-home trend. Firstly, a persuasive survey must be statistically reliable. Unfortunately, the arguer fails to prove information about the sample size and the procedure for random sample. Maybe the participants of the survey are too few or they are limited in particular occupation or particular regions, either of the sincenado, if true, will makes the sample not representative to the population. Secondly, the arguer fails to introduce the amount of the respondents' work which they are required to take home with them from the workplace in the past. With out the key information, we can not calculate the mount of the do- at-home work now. Absent such important information, the arguer can hardly make me take seriously his or her recommendation.

In the second place, the arguer falsely assumes that the demand of home office machines will increase, which means that home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders and fax machines are necessary for do-at-home work. Admittedly, in the past, those devices are necessary for work, but it is not the case nowadays. As the development of computer and internet, the do-at-home work has changed completely. Nowadays, the employees can work in the computer at home, conserve the documents to an electronic mailbox or take it to the office by mobile disk, and print it or copy it in the office rather than take papers to their office. Ignoring such a significant point, the arguer can hardly make any sound conclusion.

Last but not the least, assuming the demand of home office machines will increase, it is still hasty to conclude that office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of Valu-Nart. Firstly, the increase of the demand of home office machines can not make sure that the profit of office-supply will simultaneously. Evidently, as the increase of demand, other competitors will also increase the supply of these goods, which must enhance the competition in that market, in that case, the profit might keep constant even decrease. Secondly, even if the profit of office-supply departments will increase, it keeps uncertain whether it will become highest in Valu-Mart, especially considering that Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply department in the past. It is totally possible that the profit of other departments will increase more quickly. Because the arguer fails to take the foregoing factors into considering, his conclusion turns out to be unconvincing.

To sum up, the argument suffers from a series of logical flaws, which makes it not tenable. In order to consolidate it the arguer has to provide reliable evidence to indicate that there is work-at-home trend. In addition, he or she must analyze the prospective demand of home office machines. In order to access the argument better, we need to compare the profit of all departments in Valu-Mart.

[ 本帖最后由 乳虎 于 2007-6-9 19:28 编辑 ]

H-KevinUID: 2182070

117The 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

提纲：1作者武断地认为有一个work-at-home trend。
            2作者错误地假设 home office machines 的需求会增加。
            3作者武断的认为增加the stock of home office machines会使office-supply departments变成最盈利的部门。

In this argument， the arguer quotes a survey showing that over 70 percent of the respondents reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. On the basis, the arguer recommend that Valu-Mart increase at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders and fax machines. In addition he or she advises Valu-Mart stores to increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. Additionally, he or she claims that with those changes, Valu-Mart's office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of Valu-Mart. In my view, the argument commits a series of logical flaws, which makes the argument not convincing.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that there is a universal work-at-home trend. However, mere the survey tells little about the so-called work-at-home trend. Firstly, a persuasive survey must be statistically reliable. Unfortunately, the arguer fails to prove information about the sample size and the procedure for random sample. Maybe the participants of the survey are too few or they are limited in particular occupation or particular regions, either of the sincenado(什么意思？), if true, will makes the sample not representative to the population. Secondly, the arguer fails to introduce the amount of the respondents' work which they are required to take home with them from the workplace in the past.（最好详细说明一下，具体实际的影响，比如说：，有点抽象） With out the key information, we can not calculate the mount of the do- at-home work now. Absent such important information, the arguer can hardly make me take seriously his or her recommendation.

In the second place, the arguer falsely assumes that the demand of home office machines will increase, which means that home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders and fax machines are necessary for do-at-home work. Admittedly, in the past, those devices are necessary for work, but it is not the case nowadays. As the development of computer and internet, the do-at-home work has changed completely. Nowadays, the employees can work in the computer at home, conserve the documents to an electronic mailbox or take it to the office by mobile disk, and print it or copy it in the office rather than take papers to their office. Ignoring such a significant point, the arguer can hardly make any sound conclusion.（结尾草草收笔，可以往公司那个方向更深入一点，往回撤的句子太短）

Last but not the least, assuming the demand of home office machines will increase, it is still hasty to conclude that office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of Valu-Nart. Firstly, the increase of the demand of home office machines can not make sure that the profit of office-supply will simultaneously. Evidently, as the increase of demand, other competitors will also increase the supply of these goods, which must enhance the competition in that market, in that case, the profit might keep constant even decrease. Secondly, even if the profit of office-supply departments will increase, it keeps uncertain whether it will become highest in Valu-Mart, especially considering that Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply department in the past. It is totally possible that the profit of other departments will increase more quickly.（这句话感觉偏题了，有利益即可，关键是不是利益可以影响公司，而不是最大利益和第二大利益的争夺） Because the arguer fails to take the foregoing factors into considering, his conclusion turns out to be unconvincing.

To sum up, the argument suffers from a series of logical flaws, which makes it not tenable. In order to consolidate it the arguer has to provide reliable evidence to indicate that there is work-at-home trend. In addition, he or she must analyze the prospective demand of home office machines. In order to access the argument better, we need to compare the profit of all departments in Valu-Mart.

结尾的总结是不是可以和开头一样，稍微详细一点，感觉都是一笔带过
突破点不是特别的深入