argument4超越自我小组第一次作业

zugurrrUID: 2482827

argument4

"Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams."

The arguer concludes that for selling home quickly people should choose Adams Realty. To support it the arguer cited his experience of one in ten years before and another in last year. Meanwhile he also cites the number of agents in the two estate firms, and the last year's revenue of the both. However, through these evidences, the conclusion is unwarranted.

First, the data of these two firms through which the argument supports the superiority of Adams is vague. Only the small number of the Fitch estate agents could not proof its inferiority. The company equipped with the high technology will certainly need less employees, and the heavy burden of the employees' celeries would handicap the development of the company. On the other hand, the argue point out the many workers are part-time. But he failed to give the excise of the number and the percentage, and more important there is no information about the Adams'. So there is the possibility that the part-time workers in Adams' are much more than that in Fitch.

Second, the arguer gives no details about the professional level of the firms' workers. The only possible related information is the part-time workers. Given the much more of them in Fitch Realty firm, which of course in unwarranted, the arguer fail to provide the evidence to show that they are less effective. There is the possibility that these part-time workers are experts in the university or other research department and too busy to take the full-time job in Fitch.

Third, the compared of last year's revenues is insufficient to support the arguer's conclusion. The annual revenue depends on too many factors, such as the size of the company, the market's instability, and so forth. And the arguer only provides the last one year's information, there is no way to prove these dates is the current tendency of the two companies development.

At last, the arguer's own experience is unwarranted to the support the conclusion. On one hand, as those two deals one in ten years also and the other in last year. Nine years later, the market of the selling houses of course could not stay still. So the extent of the difficulties of selling the house is different, and the prices certainly changes. On the other hand, the arguer provides no information about the detail of these two houses which he listed to Adam and Fitch respectively. Therefore maybe he list on Fitch of a very shabby house in the poor distinct. Moreover as the common sense each company should have its advantages and shortcoming and so do these two companies. However the arguer advises all customers with various kinds of houses for selling to the Adam at all. These must be misleading.

In sum, there are no reasons that prove Adam Realty is superior to Fitch Realty and the inferior professional level of the Fitch's workers, but there are reasons to provide more excise evidence to support the more revenue of Adam is because of this company's efficiency. And unless the arguer offered the details of his own two deals to prove the Adam's more success, the suggestion of the selling house people to Adam Realty is unwarranted and misleading.


拍呵！~~

啊拉UID: 2527432

The arguer concludes that for selling home quickly people should choose Adams Realty. To support it the arguer cited his experience of one in ten years before and another in last year. (这里的one和another表述可能引起混淆…) Meanwhile he also cites the number of agents in the two estate firms, and the last year's revenue of the both. However, through these evidences, the conclusion is unwarranted.
First, the data of these two firms through which the argument supports the superiority of Adams is vague. Only the small number of the Fitch estate agents could not proof its inferiority. The company equipped with the high technology will certainly need fewer employees, and the heavy burden of the employees' salaries would handicap the development of the company. On the other hand, the argue point out many workers are part-time. But he/she failed to give the excise of the number and the percentage, and more important there is no information about the Adams'. So there is the possibility that the part-time workers in Adams' are much more than that in Fitch. (这段开头质疑的没有问题,人数少不代表效率低等等,但是之后的part-time workers in Adam are even more质疑的有一些牵强,毕竟作者的目的是说服那些想要把房子卖的更快更高的人选择Adam,而之所以选他是因为Adam本身卖房子比较高和快,从这一点来说,雇员是否part-time和卖房子好坏无直接联系,可以考虑从这个方面攻击,而不是仅仅质疑作者数据提供模糊不清…纯属个人意见..)
Second, the arguer gives no details about the professional level of the firms' workers. The only possible related information is the part-time workers. Given the much more of them in Fitch Realty firm, which of course in unwarranted, the arguer fail to provide the evidence to show that they are less effective. There is the possibility that these part-time workers are experts in the university or other research department and too busy to take the full-time job in Fitch.(在part-time和员工数量上过多纠缠了…个人认为这点不是致命伤..)
Third, the compared of last year's revenues is insufficient to support the arguer's conclusion. The annual revenue depends on too many factors, such as the size of the company, the market's instability, and so forth. And the arguer only provides the last year's information, there is no way to prove these data is the current tendency of the two companies development.(质疑的很好,但因为前面花太多时间所以这里没来得及展开…)
At last, the arguer's own experience is unwarranted to the support the conclusion. On one hand, as those two deals one in ten years also and the other in last year. Nine years later, the market of the selling houses of course could not stay still. So the extent of the difficulties of selling the house is different, and the prices certainly changes. On the other hand, the arguer provides no information about the detail of these two houses which he listed to Adam and Fitch respectively. Therefore maybe he list on Fitch of a very shabby house in the poor distinct. Moreover as the common sense each company should have its advantages and shortcoming and so do these two companies. However the arguer advises all customers with various kinds of houses for selling to the Adam at all. These must be misleading.(这段质疑的很好=.=…其实我也是这么想的)
In sum, there are no reasons that prove Adam Realty is superior to Fitch Realty and the inferior professional level of the Fitch's workers, but there are reasons to provide more excise evidence to support the more revenue of Adam is because of this company's efficiency. And unless the arguer offered the details of his own two deals to prove the Adam's more success, the suggestion of the selling house people to Adam Realty is unwarranted and misleading.

(总的来说写得不错,个人建议是从逻辑链出发而不是点,即结论(我们应该选Adam因为卖的快\高)—过渡(为什么卖的快和高呢?那是因为)—逻辑点(原来是因为a.人多b.自己有经验c.去年的收入…)然后开始质疑逻辑点并不能向上推出我们就必须选择Adam…步步推进~~=.=)

cartographer08UID: 2523568

Argument4

First, the data of these two firms through which the argument supports the superiority of Adams is vague. Only the small number of the Fitch estate agents could not prove its inferiority. The company equipped with the high technology will certainly need fewer employees, and the heavy burden of the employees' celeries would handicap the development of the company. On the other hand (on the one hand 在哪儿？), the arguer point out that many workers are part-time. But he failed to give the excise of the number and the percentage, and more important there is no information about the Adams'. So there is the possibility that the part-time workers in Adams' are much more than that in Fitch.

Second, the arguer gives no details about the professional level of the firms' workers. The only possible related information is the part-time workers. Given the much more of them in Fitch Realty firm (不够清楚), which of course in unwarranted, the arguer fail to provide the evidence to show that they are less effective. There is the possibility that these part-time workers are experts in the university or other research department and too busy to take the full-time job in Fitch. 关于professional level和前一段是不是有点儿重复？

Third, the compared (comparison) of last year's revenues is insufficient to support the arguer's conclusion. The annual revenue depends on too many factors, such as the size of the company, the market's instability, and so forth. And the arguer only provides the last one year's information; there is no way to prove these dates are the current tendency of the two company’s development.At last, the arguer's own experience is unwarranted to the support the conclusion. On one hand, as those two deals one in ten years also and the other in last year. Nine years later, the market of the selling houses of course could not stay still. So the extent of the difficulties of selling the house is different, and the prices certainly changes. On the other hand, the arguer provides no information about the detail of these two houses which he listed to Adam and Fitch respectively. Therefore maybe he list on Fitch of a very shabby house in the poor distinct. Moreover as the common sense each company should have its advantages and shortcoming and so do these two companies (然后呢，没有时间展开了？). However the arguer advises all customers with various kinds of houses for selling to the Adam at all. These must be misleading.


Agrument 好像不是很好改，题目中能挑的错误很多


[ 本帖最后由 cartographer08 于 2008-8-7 00:30 编辑 ]