Argument180 [OB小组]_第18次作业_Easy speed reading

ldongxpUID: 2311083

TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
WORDS: 511          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2007-7-30

In this argument, the author recommends that Acme require all of their employees to take the Easy Read (ER) to benefit their company. To support this recommendation, the author notes that one graduate of the ER course can read a five-hundred-page report only in two hours. The author also points out that another graduate of ER rose from an assistant manager to vice president of company in under a year. Additionally, the author considered the $500 fee is quite worthy. However this argument suffers from several flaws and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author unfairly assumes that one graduate of ER can read very fast is due to benefit of the course. The argument provides us with no other information about the graduate. It is entirely possible that the person is always good at reading and can read eight-hundred-page report in only two hours before he took the ER course. The ER course had decreased his reading speed. Or perhaps the report is quite simple and normal person need only one hour to finish it. Without accounting for these and other possibilities, the author makes an unjustifiable assumption.

Secondly, even assuming that the graduate's speed of reading is due to ER course, the author makes an additional assumption that the ER course is responsible for another graduate's quick promotion. The author overlooks other factors that can also lead to such result. Perhaps the person can study quickly himself so that without the study in ER he can still rise from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Or perhaps the vice president of the company suddenly caught a disease and the person substituted the vice president. The author cannot substantiate the assumption without ruling out these and other explanations for the graduate's promotion.

Thirdly, the conclusion that all of their employees need to take the ER course is unwarranted. Even assuming that the foregoing assumptions can be substantiated by the author, there is no evidence show that all employees in the company need to take ER. Perhaps some employees can read fast enough to do their jobs well and it is a waste of money for them to take ER. Or perhaps some employees who are in charge of driving or carrying and need not read at all. These employees do not require taking ER. The author makes a hasty conclusion without consider whether all employees need ER course.

Finally, the author assumes the $500 is a worthy price. Without any information of the market of speed-reading courses, this assumption is unconvincing. Perhaps there are other speed-reading courses which charge $400 and provide the same course and service as ER.  

In sum, this argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster this recommendation, the author must provide clear evidence that the two graduates' performance is due to the ER course and why all of their employee need take ER course. To better assess the recommendation, more information about the ER course and more detail about the two graduates are needed.

phillipsareaUID: 2318537

In this argument, the author recommends that Acme require all of their employees to take the Easy Read (ER) to benefit their company. To support this recommendation, the author notes that one graduate of the ER course can read a five-hundred-page report only in two hours. The author also points out that another graduate of ER rose from an assistant manager to vice president of company in under a year. Additionally, the author considered the $500 fee is quite worthy. However this argument suffers from several flaws and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author unfairly assumes that one graduate of ER can read very fast is due to benefit of the course. The argument provides us with no other information about the graduate. It is entirely possible that the person is always good at reading and can read eight-hundred-page report in only two hours before he took the ER course. The ER course had decreased his reading speed.(真狠那,不过驳的很好,就是要抓住要害) Or perhaps the report is quite simple and normal person need only one hour to finish it. Without accounting for these and other possibilities, the author makes an unjustifiable assumption.

Secondly, even assuming that the graduate's speed of reading is due to ER course, the author makes an additional assumption that the ER course is responsible for another graduate's quick promotion. The author overlooks other factors that can also lead to such result.(两段之间开始有联系性了,好!) Perhaps the person can study quickly himself so that without the study in ER he can still rise from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Or perhaps the vice president of the company suddenly caught a disease and the person substituted the vice president. The author cannot substantiate the assumption without ruling out these and other explanations for the graduate's promotion.

Thirdly, the conclusion that all of their employees need to take the ER course is unwarranted. Even assuming that the foregoing assumptions can be substantiated by the author, there is no evidence show that all employees in the company need to take ER. Perhaps some employees can read fast enough to do their jobs well and it is a waste of money for them to take ER. Or perhaps some employees who are in charge of driving or carrying and need not read at all. These employees do not require taking ER. The author makes a hasty conclusion without consider whether all employees need ER course.

Finally, the author assumes the $500 is a worthy price. Without any information of the market of speed-reading courses, this assumption is unconvincing. Perhaps there are other speed-reading courses which charge $400 and provide the same course and service as ER.  

In sum, this argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster this recommendation, the author must provide clear evidence that the two graduates' performance is due to the ER course and why all of their employee need take ER course. To better assess the recommendation, more information about the ER course and more detail about the two graduates are needed.

这篇ARGU写的真的很好,"Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter"这一段不知道是不是你觉得已经没必要驳了,反正是篇好ARGU