argument12 风之声

f_l_wUID: 2112831

Argument12

The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.

"During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."

In this argument, the author recommends that we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep in order to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity. To demonstrate his conclusion, the author cites Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. To further support his claim, the author also cites the evidence that experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Close scrutiny of the facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the author’s recommendation.

To begin with, a threshold problem with this argument is that the author’s claim is based on the assumption that Alta manufacturing would get the same affects as Panoply Industries if they reduce each work shifts one hour, because experts believe that fatigue and sleep deprivation is a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents. However, there is no evidence to substantiate that is the case. Without sufficient evidence, it is possible that Alta Manufacturing workers are far less careful than Panoply Industries, or perhaps, Alta Manufacturing work condition has deteriorated greatly recently years . If so, shorten each of their three work shifts by one hour would not help them cut down the accidents because this is not the reason why they have many accidents. Even if they have similarities in many conditions, the author still con not conclude that the success can be duplicated by Alta. Without considering these possibilities above, the author cannot make any sound conclusion.

Secondly, the author falsely rests his conclusion on a suspicious assumption that shorten work shifts would reduce the number of on-job-accidents at Alta. The author explains a result contributed by many factor with just one cause which is insufficient to support the result. Perhaps, after shorten work shifts these works spent more time on pastime which would make them still fatigue when they are in work, or perhaps, they spent more time on their part time job. Either of the scenarios, if true, might undermine the author’s assumption.

Finally, another flaw must be pointed out before I am convinced is that the author unreasonably based his conclusion on the assumption that if they reduce the accidents, they will increase productivity. However, the author provides no evidence to substantiate it. For that matter, It is just likely that the productivity decreases while the accidents have not been cut down because other factors such as machine conditions have changed a lot.

In conclusion, this argument is logically flawed and unpersuasive. To make it acceptable, the author must provide adequate evidence about the work conditions in Alta. In addition, I need more information concerning the differences between two Manufacturing to better evaluate the author’s recommendation.