argument17同主题

cplpsyUID: 2169409

提纲
次数多不等于服务好
卡车多不等于效率高
调查缺乏代表性
WORDS: 404          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2006-3-28

To begin with, although the editor cites several facts and statistics, which he believes, can support the claim that the town council’s decision is mistaken and they should continue using EZ for their trash collection, I wonder whether they are convincing or could bear further analysis.

The arguer does not provide sufficient evidence support EZ have better service than ABC. It is mentioned in the argument that EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once, the assumption of the arguer is that the more times to collect trash the better its service, but it is not the case. Perhaps ABC could collect all the trash cleanly once a week, while EZ could not finish the job one time and have to collect once more. Hence, if they could not provide good service, even the times is twice, I guess the citizen in Walnut Grove will not feel satisfied and prefer the corporation as their service supplier.

Similarly, the arguer assumes that the service is the function of the number of trucks. If we concede to make a comparison about the trucks of the two companies based on the consideration that good instruments will have an effect on the quality of work., it seems that EZ have trucks as many as than ABC and has order more car, however, what will the matter be when taking the performance and the capacity of the truck? It is entirely possible that ABC's truck is larger and can carry more trash than EZ’s, for example if the truck's capacity of ABC is twice one in EZ, even if the numbers of trucks they owned are similar, the efficacy of work will be very difference from each other.

Another flaw in the argument is that the survey on which the conclusion based on is unreliable itself. When evaluating a survey, one must consider whether the respondents are representative and sufficient. As the arguer mentioned there are 80 percent of respondents are satisfied with EZ's performance, but what percentage are they in the whole inhabitants? If the respondents are only a small part of the whole, we could not take the result as the attitude of people overall in Walnut Grove. Thus, in absence of the detail information of sample, the arguer can not claim that people in Walnut Grove are satisfied with EZ.

In conclusion, before turn the contract back to EZ from ABC, the arguer should better find sound evidence that most residents are more favorable with the service EZ than ABC, and further, justify the service in EZ is really better than ABC.