Argument117 【METTLE小组】第三次作业 by happyhappypig

happyhappypigUID: 2342810

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."

Words: 511

In the above argument, the business manager of Valu-Mart (VM) suggests increasing stock of office supplied with support of the work-at-home trend, intending to turn it the most profitable component of the stores. However, the ratiocination is neither cogent nor persuasive. Closer scrutiny would reveal several logical fallacies he commits as illustrated below.

First of all, whether the work-at-home trend is applicable to all the stores is open to doubt. Myriads of variables should be taken into consideration upon the interpretation of the survey, such as the distribution of the respondents, the nature of the works, the magnitude of the different working load, etc. It is possible that multitudes of the respondents are working in metropolitans or in some industrial or business center, with their work increasing concurrently with local economy expanding, whereas a large percent of the stores are located in the small cities, with no such trend. Or perhaps the more home-taking work is due to certain emergency projects or newly developed commercial center, with heavy work only in initial period. Either of the above scenarios, if true, would cause serious doubt upon the decision to increase office supplies in the stores.

Secondly, even if we concede that a diversity of jobs nationwide, the manager falsely assumes that home working people would definitely need office machines and office supplies at home. Yet no evidence is provided to support such presumption. It is highly likely that actually particular jobs require more home working, such as internet managers or software developer due to the widespread and extensive internet usage and high demand of regulation. However, they mainly use computers to work, with little involvement of office supplies. Even for those who may need certain office supplies at home, we cannot rule out the possibility that these supplies have already been offered by their employers of the company. Unless given information about the type and the rough amount of supplies people needs, or the availability of these office supplies, hardly can we make any predication about the sales of the office supplies.

Moreover, even assuming that people do need to buy office supplies themselves to work at home, whether they will buy products in VM is unwarranted. There are many influencing factors determining which brand a customer would buy. For instance, whether the price of the office supplies are acceptable, whether the quality of the products is trustable, whether the sizes or the colors of papers meet the standards or whether the printers have high enough resolutions, etc. If the company use certain brand for their office daily usage, people who take work home would probably also by products of than brand. Without confirming customers from the market, how can VM’s office supply department gain expected profits, let alone becoming the most profitable components of the stores.

Taken together, the above argument is not well reasoned as it stands and renders it lacks credibility. Unless discussion about the specificity of the work-at-home trend, the market needs of the office-related product and the advantage compared with competitors, the arguer’s suggestion cannot be adopted.

[ 本帖最后由 happyhappypig 于 2007-6-16 23:41 编辑 ]

一米八四UID: 2317911

好像这篇应该写成提纲 呵呵
我到时候帮你改这篇也可以 另外帮我看看我那篇argu 还是狠批啊:)
我帮你改那篇要是有我说的不对的地方麻烦你告诉我一声 我尽力帮你改就是了 有的可能是我水平不够造成把你对的说成错的了 包涵

一米八四UID: 2317911

In the above argument, the business manager of Valu-Mart (VM) suggests increasing stock of office supplied with support of the work-at-home trend, intending to turn it the most profitable component of the stores. However, the ratiocination is neither cogent nor persuasive. Closer scrutiny would reveal (reveals) several logical fallacies he commits as illustrated below.

First of all, whether the work-at-home trend is applicable to all the stores is open to doubt. Myriads of variables should be taken into consideration upon the interpretation of the survey, such as the distribution of the respondents, the nature of the works, the magnitude of the different working load, etc. It is possible that multitudes of the respondents are working in metropolitans or in some industrial or business center, with their work increasing concurrently with local economy expanding, whereas a large percent of the stores are located in the small cities, with no such trend. Or perhaps (the more)(有点别扭)  home-taking work is due to certain emergency projects or newly developed commercial center, with heavy work only in initial period. Either of the above scenarios, if true, would cause serious doubt upon the decision to increase office supplies in the stores.

Secondly, even if we concede that a diversity of jobs nationwide, the manager falsely assumes that home working people would definitely need office machines and office supplies at home. Yet no evidence is provided to support such presumption. It is highly likely that actually particular jobs require more home working, such as internet managers or software developer due to the widespread and extensive internet usage and high demand of regulation. However, they mainly use computers to work, with little involvement of office supplies. Even for those who may need certain office supplies at home, we cannot rule out the possibility that these supplies have already been offered by their employers of the company. Unless given information about the type and the rough amount of supplies people needs, or the availability of these office supplies, hardly can we make any predication about the sales of the office supplies.（我觉得这段写的特别好呵呵J）

Moreover, even assuming that people do need to buy office supplies themselves to work at home, whether they will buy products in VM is unwarranted. There are many influencing factors determining which brand a customer would buy. For instance, whether the price of the office supplies are acceptable, whether the quality of the products is trustable, whether the sizes or the colors of papers meet the standards or whether the printers have high enough resolutions, etc. If the company use certain brand for their office daily usage, people who take work home would probably also by products of than brand. Without confirming customers from the market, how can VM’s office supply department gain expected profits, let alone becoming the most profitable components of the stores (store没必要加s).

Taken together, the above argument is not well reasoned as it stands and renders it lacks credibility. Unless discussion about the specificity of the work-at-home trend, the market needs of the office-related product and the advantage compared with competitors, the arguer’s suggestion cannot be adopted.

lz的论述实在太强了，循序渐进，我表达不出我的意思，可以肯定的是你这种攻击方式十分值得我学习。
lz可以试着在攻击各个错误观点的时候用一些疑问句型再否定，比如第三个错误，这样能使文章更生动，而且ETS 也喜欢这种表达方式。

另外看了lz几篇文章好像各段的开头用词都比较相似，无论是argu还是issue 我想lz可以试着在这里下下功夫。

加油~PFPF

[ 本帖最后由 一米八四 于 2007-6-17 13:48 编辑 ]

strokes7UID: 2262256

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 theyare required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they werein the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supplydepartments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend byincreasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such asprinters, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will alsoincrease stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With thesechanges, our office-supply departments will become the most profitablecomponent of our stores."

Words: 511

In the above argument, the business manager of Valu-Mart (VM) suggestsincreasing stock of office supplied with support of the work-at-home trend,intending to turn it the most profitable component of the stores. (这句话我实在没怎么看懂，with support 是不是 to support更好；intengding 表示伴随的意向么？) However, theratiocination is neither cogent nor persuasive. Closer scrutiny would revealseveral logical fallacies he commits as illustrated below.

First of all, whether the work-at-home trend is applicable to all the stores isopen to doubt. Myriads of variables should be taken into consideration upon theinterpretation of the survey, such as the distribution of the respondents, thenature of the works, the magnitude of the different working load, etc. It ispossible that multitudes of the respondents are working in metropolitans or insome industrial or business center, with their work increasing concurrentlywith local economy expanding, whereas a large percent of the stores are locatedin the small cities, with no such trend. Or perhaps the more home-taking workis due to certain emergency projects or newly developed commercial center, withheavy work only in initial period. Either of the above scenarios, if true,would cause serious doubt upon the decision to increase office supplies in thestores. (我觉得这段的论证不够Cogent，对于第一点，只要本公司在大城市有店面，就应该加大这项业务啊，所以要说明调查发生的地方与作者公司的不相关性；第二点，紧急情况和初始期需要再家办公，那么有可能将来还会出现紧急情况，你并没有说明因为是紧急或初始情况就不需要家庭办公用品了啊)

Secondly, even if we concede that a diversity of jobs nationwide, the managerfalsely assumes that home working people would definitely need office machinesand office supplies at home. Yet（这个地方没必要转折） no evidence is provided to support such presumption. It is highlylikely that actually particular jobs require more home working, such asinternet managers or software developer due to the widespread and extensiveinternet usage and high demand of regulation. However, they mainly usecomputers to work, with little involvement of office supplies. Even for thosewho may need certain office supplies at home, we cannot rule out thepossibility that these supplies have already been offered by their employers ofthe company. Unless given information about the type and the rough amount ofsupplies people needs, or the availability of these office supplies, hardly canwe make any predication about the sales of the office supplies.（考虑到你说的第二点，就是公司可以提供家庭办公用品，那么你的TS就要改一下了，不应该说assumption是人们不需要办公用品，而应该是不需要购买家庭办公用品）

Moreover, even assuming that people do need to buy office supplies themselvesto work at home, whether they will buy products in VM is unwarranted. There aremany influencing factors determining which brand a customer would buy. Forinstance, whether the price of the office supplies are acceptable, whether thequality of the products is trustable, whether the sizes or the colors of papersmeet the standards or whether the printers have high enough resolutions, etc.（相当有力啊，我都能感到你指着鼻子骂人呢） If the companyuse certain brand for their office daily usage, people who take work home wouldprobably also by products of than brand.（这句要再展开一下，否则人家很难明白你在说顾客只会买所在公司所用的品牌，而本店可能没有这些品牌） Without confirming customers from the market, how can VM’s officesupply department gain expected profits, let alone becoming the most profitablecomponents of the stores.

Taken together, the above argument is not well reasoned as it stands andrenders it lacks credibility. Unless discussion about the specificity of thework-at-home trend, the market needs of the office-related product and theadvantage compared with competitors, the arguer’s suggestion cannot be adopted.


那天看了版主给我的评价，忽然发现我们的文章存在的一个问题，虽然给出了很多可能性，但是还不够tranchent

[ 本帖最后由 strokes7 于 2007-6-21 12:49 编辑 ]

happyhappypigUID: 2342810

1. About Body2, 我的意思是说如果不是所有的城市都有work at home的趋势，那为什么所有的点都要加强office suppliment呢，只要需要的店加强就可以了啊。It is possible that multitudes of the respondents are working in metropolitans or insome industrial or business center, with their work increasing concurrently with local economy expanding, whereas a large percent of the stores are located in the small cities, with no such trend. ADD: Therefore, there is no necessicty to increase the office suppliments stocks in every store. 应该可以解释吧

2.我的ts说的是need啊，没明白你的意思,我的意思就是或者公司本身就提供了，或者要用和公司一样的牌子

3. body3
If the companyuse certain brand for their office daily usage, people who take work home would probably also by products of than particular brand to for consistent appearance. Other wise, the customers or the collaborator may doubt the preciseness of their job or suspect whether the workers are scrupulous. 这样算是展开了吗？

其实我还真的不知道怎样算是论述的严谨哦，我觉得写例子就要很长时间，再论述，半个小时够吗？

strokes7UID: 2262256

对于Body2我的想法是TS说的在家办公不一定需要文具。而第二个论点说的是在家还是需要办公用品的，只不过由公司提供了，所以我觉得TS和后面不搭调。不过确实也改得有点吹毛求疵了，exacting，哈哈，不过确实给你改作文很费力，很难改出什么问题来，我也是尽力想给你提些意见。

我也对那个如何再深入论证很不解，不过可以肯定的是我有待改进的地方比你得多，我GF也说我的文章不够trenchant