argument117 【勇往直前小组】第三春

nornsUID：2325187

TOPIC: ARGUMENT117 - The 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."
       TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2007-7-22 23:00:36

By giving evidence that 70 percent of the responds to a survey are required to take more work at home, and that the sales in office-supply has no impressive increase; the author concludes that there is a trend to work at home and suggest the shop to change the structure of goods in office-supply. From the first glance, the assertion seem to be sound, however, after cognitive thinking, it is not that convincible.
   Firstly, the survey cited by the author is insufficient for supporting that there's a work-at-home trend, especially in the area where the shop is located. The total number of the survey is unknown, if the survey is based on only 100 people, then for a city of 10,000 people, the result is not convincible. What's more, if the survey is done where the companies of information technology are gathered, it might constitute more people working in IT rather than other occupations, therefore it can not represent the whole working class. What’s more, even if the survey can prove that there is such a trend, if the survey is not done where the shop is located; we can not guarantee that in the area of the shop, the conclusion still holds. Hence, before more details has know for the survey, we cannot draw the conclusion of such a trend in the area of the shop.
  Secondly, Even if the trend existed, there is no impressive promotion in the sales in the past doesn’t suggest it's due to such a trend. Based on this, then the suggested adaptation of the supply  is not convincible. Maybe the time that there is no impressive promotion in the sales is quite short, and can be temporary fluctuate. Or maybe the change is due to the depression of the economy in such time. So, the author doesn’t offer information showing direct cause-and-effect relationship between the trend and the sales, so the suggestion is not convincible.
  What's more, even if the trend affected the sales of the shop, we are not reasonable to deduce that such changes in goods-supply will reach maximum profits. It is quite possible that such a trend is not a decisive factor for the rise of the sales. For example, maybe the shop is near to a school or university where there are more students than working class, and therefore printers and fax machines are not in high demand and the office-supply department of the shop should bringing more textbooks. Therefore, before knowing more details showing that such changes can result in most profits, the suggestion is not convincible.
   In summary, before doing the final decision of change the structure of the goods-supply, the author should provide more information about the survey to convince the trend, more information to show that the trend is the main cause of the non-increase of the sales and more evidence to support that such a change will result in maximum profits.

nornsUID：2325187

Argument：167（频次32，第3类比较引论），56（频次23，第4类现象分析），192（频次22，第5类观点说明），120（频次25，第6类描述现象/解决问题）
修改方案：
167
1 时间上类比不成立
2 即使有效不代表能治愈
3 30个人好少


56


1.发现Kali的头和手的磨具，不足以排除kali人不用雕刻工具来制作statue
2.发现头和手的磨具不能说明Kali人只在等身大小的雕塑身上使用磨具，更不能解释小雕塑抽象和形态各异的特点
3.其他因素：作者没有考虑其他可能导致小雕塑贬值的因素，可能小雕塑多，大的少；或者大的更有意义，使君主的雕像，小的什么都不是

192
1接电话的例子不能说明有矛盾，confuse
2即使合并了也不省资源
3审资源和人员重新分配矛盾
4类比错误

120

10年前和10年后
1交通状况不一样
2骑乘人不一样
3人数是多少？
4伤害程度

即使正确，也可能是它因

zhangjing106UID：2157010

By giving evidence that 70 percent of the responds to a survey are required to take more work at home, and that the sales in office-supply has no impressive increase; the author concludes that there is a trend to work at home and suggest the shop to change the structure of goods in office-supply. From the first glance, the assertion seem to be sound, however, after cognitive thinking, it is not that convincible.
   Firstly, the survey cited by the author is insufficient for supporting that there's a work-at-home trend, especially in the area where the shop is located. The total number of the survey is unknown, if the survey is based on only 100 people, then for a city of 10,000 people, the result is not convincible. What's more, if the survey is done where the companies of information technology are gathered, it might constitute more people working in IT rather than other occupations, therefore it can not represent the whole working class. What’s more, even if the survey can prove that there is such a trend, if the survey is not done where the shop is located; we can not guarantee that in the area of the shop, the conclusion still holds. Hence, before more details has(have) know for the survey, we cannot draw the conclusion of such a trend in the area of the shop.
  Secondly, Even if the trend existed, there is no impressive promotion in the sales in the past doesn’t suggest it's due to such a trend. Based on this, then the suggested adaptation of the supply is not convincible. Maybe the time that there is no impressive promotion in the sales is quite short, and can be temporary fluctuate. Or maybe the change is due to the depression of the economy in such time. So, the author doesn’t offer information showing direct cause-and-effect relationship between the trend and the sales, so the suggestion is not convincible.
  What's more, even if the trend affected the sales of the shop, we are not reasonable to deduce that such changes in goods-supply will reach maximum profits. It is quite possible that such a trend is not a decisive factor for the rise of the sales. For example, maybe the shop is near to a school or university where there are more students than working class, and therefore printers and fax machines are not in high demand and the office-supply department of the shop should bringing more textbooks. Therefore, before knowing more details showing that such changes can result in most profits, the suggestion is not convincible.
   In summary, before doing the final decision of change the structure of the goods-supply, the author should provide more information about the survey to convince the trend, more information to show that the trend is the main cause of the non-increase of the sales and more evidence to support that such a change will result in maximum profits.

一个小问题，别的没问题，很多句式我抄下来了，呵呵

woodmanUID：161906

Bygiving evidence that 70 percent of the responds to a survey are required totake more work at home, and that the sales in office-supply has no impressiveincrease; the author concludes that there is a trend to work at home andsuggest the shop to change the structure of goods in office-supply. From thefirst glance, the assertion seem to be sound, however, after cognitivethinking, it is not that convincible.

   Firstly, the survey cited by the author is insufficient forsupporting that there's a work-at-home trend, especially in the area where theshop is located. The total number of the survey is unknown, if the survey isbased on only 100 people, then for a city of 10,000 people, the result is notconvincible. What's more, if the survey is done where the companies ofinformation technology are gathered, it might constitute more people working inIT rather than other occupations, therefore it can not represent the wholeworking class. What’s more, even if the survey can prove that there is such atrend, if the survey is not done where the shop is located; we can notguarantee that in the area of the shop, the conclusion still holds. Hence,before more details has(have) know for thesurvey, we cannot draw the conclusion of such a trend in the area of the shop.

  Secondly, Even if the trend existed, there is no impressivepromotion in the sales in the past doesn’t suggest it's due to such a trend.Based on this, then the suggested adaptation of the supply is notconvincible. Maybe the time that there is no impressive promotion in the salesis quite short, and can be temporary fluctuate. Or maybe the change is due tothe depression of the economy in such time. So, the author doesn’t offerinformation showing direct cause-and-effect relationship between the trend andthe sales, so the suggestion is not convincible. 这一段还可以展开一下，写的有点少了

  What's more, even if the trend affected the sales of the shop, we are not reasonable(有点中文味道，it is reasonable)to deduce that such changes in goods-supply will reachmaximum profits. It is quite possible that such atrend is not a decisive factor for the rise of the sales.（这一句怪怪的，你前面没有提及sale增加了，突然说这个trend不是sale增加的主要原因） For example,maybe the shop is near to a school or university where there are more studentsthan working class, and therefore printers and fax machines are not in highdemand and the office-supply department of the shop should bringing(bring) more textbooks. Therefore, beforeknowing more details showing that such changes can result in most profits, thesuggestion is not convincible.

   In summary, before doing the final decision of change thestructure of the goods-supply, the author should provide more information aboutthe survey to convince the trend, more information to show that the trend isthe main cause of the non-increase of the sales and more evidence to supportthat such a change will result in maximum profits.
这一篇argument与上一篇风格有差异，呵呵
提纲没有什么问题