argument178 必回拍

xbcperceptionUID: 2309800

"In order to save money, we at the National Brush Company have decided to pay our employees for each brush they produce instead of for the time they spend producing brushes. We believe that this policy will lead to the production of more and better brushes, will allow us to reduce our staff size, and will enable the company factories to operate for fewer hours-resulting in savings on electricity and security costs. These changes will ensure that the best workers keep their jobs and that the company will earn a profit in the coming year."
WORDS: 439          TIME: 00:43:28          DATE: 2007-7-12 10:47:41

The arguer alleges that we should adopt a new policy which pays our staffs according to the number of brushes they produce rather than the time of working. He claims this policy will do lots of benefits do our company. It seems reasonable ostensibly, but in-depth investigation reveals it suffers several logical errors.

To begin with, the arguer presumptuously assumes that this policy will lead to producing more and better brushes. Nevertheless, this might be not the case. According to this policy, the number of brushed produced is in a direct relationship with the wages the workers get. So on certain circumstance, if the workers are satisfied with the current amount of money they get, this policy will not stimulate them to produce more brushes. And also even the workers are motivated by this policy to produce more brushes, there is no evidence shows that the quality of these brushes will be better than the ones produced before. The policy just concerns about the quantities of the brush, so the staff may just concentrate their attention on the numbers of brushes without any consideration of quality. As a consequence, the qualities of brushes created in a very short time are very likely inferior to the ones produced in a longer time. Without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer can not make the conclusion convincing.

Moreover, the assumption that this policy will reduce our staff size is unconvincing. Although we may produce more brushes at a given time, but due to lots of brushes maybe not qualified, which is very likely to happen because they are produced in such a hasty, the actually qualified number of brushes are diminishing. So the net production of this Company is decreasing rather than escalating. Thus, the company may not reduce its staff size due to there is no sign that the net production is increasing.

Finally, the arguer too hasty to makes the conclusion that the company will earn a profit in the coming year. There are lots of factors affect the profits of a company. We do not know the current financial situation of this company, perhaps this company is in debt before it makes these changes. So even these changes have positive effects on the productions of brushes, if the influences of this policy are minor compared with the problems exist in the company, these positive effects may just have a little impact on the company and will not lead to profits in a very short time.

In sum, the arguer's claim is suspicious in several aspects, to better assess his argument he need to make clear all these possibilities mentioned above.