Argument4 留链接回拍

cavanaUID: 2178782

TOPIC: ARGUMENT 4 - The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.

"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."
WORDS: 389          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2006-2-21

The argument that the Adams are superior than the Fitch to be the home-sellers' choose for Adams sell houses quickly and at a good price as the arguer asserts, is sounding and convincing at the first glance. However, I am afraid that his argument can hardly bear further consideration since there are several flaws and foible in it.

First, the arguer pointed that the Adams has 40 real estate agents, in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. As common sense, the number of staff is little related to the efficiency of work. We do not know why the Adams needs more agents than Fitch, for Adams has more business than Fitch, or just because the employees in Adams are lower efficient than the members of Fitch's.

Second, only the number of revenue can not be the evidence to prove the Adam had a better profit than Fitch.  The higher averaged home sales of Adam may just because the fundamental prices offered by the home-sellers are higher than that of Fitch. So it is probably that the Adam had not enhance the price of the houses  higher than  Fitch, and Adam may even got less more than Fitch in these purchases.

Third, the conditions of  two of the arguer's houses might be different greatly, and the condition of the real estate market might be different either. Ten years ago, people may not be as hot hearted to be the houses selling as they are today, so few of them would notice the advertisement of the arguer's house . And one the other side, the first house of the arguer might be simple and not be in the flourishing area, but the second one which is sold by the Adams may be better in decorations and structures, and in a place which has a more comfortable environment and more convenience transport conditions than the first one. So the time for sale of these two different  houses can not prove the Adams sell houses more quickly than Fitch.

After pointing out so many flaws in the argument, now we can say that the reasons the arguer used to support the conclusion can not be relied on. The arguer needs more detailed data and convincing comparison between Adams and Fitch to prove the conclusion that Adams is superior than Fitch.

forget56UID: 2137078

The argument that the Adams are superior than the Fitch to be the home-sellers' choose for Adams sell houses quickly and at a good price as the arguer asserts, is sounding and convincing at the first glance. However, I am afraid that his argument can hardly bear further consideration since there are several flaws and foible（foibles） in it.

First, the arguer pointed(out) that the Adams has 40 real estate agents, in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. As common sense, the number of staff is little related to the efficiency of work. We do not know why the Adams needs more agents than Fitch, for Adams has more business than Fitch, or just because the employees in Adams are lower(less) efficient than the members of Fitch's(Fitch).

Second, only the number of revenue can not be the evidence to prove the Adam had a better profit than Fitch.  The higher averaged home sales of Adam may just because the fundamental prices offered by the home-sellers are higher than that of Fitch. So it is probably that the Adam had not enhance the price of the houses  higher than  Fitch, and Adam may even got less more than Fitch in these purchases.

Third, the conditions of  two of the arguer's houses might be different greatly, and the condition of the real estate market might be different either. Ten years ago, people may not be as hot hearted to be the houses selling as they are today, so few of them would notice the advertisement of the arguer's house . And one the other side, the first house of the arguer might be simple and not be in the flourishing area, but the second one which is sold by the Adams may be better in decorations and structures, and in a place which has a more comfortable environment and more convenience transport conditions than the first one. So the time for sale of these two different  houses can not prove the Adams sell houses more quickly than Fitch.

After pointing out so many flaws in the argument, now we can say that the reasons the arguer used to support the conclusion can not be relied on. The arguer needs more detailed data and convincing comparison between Adams and Fitch to prove the conclusion that Adams is superior than Fitch.
思路还是比较清晰的，但前两个论证显得仓促了点，是因为时间来不及吧？不过没什么大的问题，实在很难得！
看完后翻了一下自己的提纲，发现跟你的写法居然是一样的，看来我也需要限时练习一下才能知道自己的情况了。
syllabus:
1.通过员工的人数无法说明Adams 比 Fitch 优越，考虑员工的素质，办事的效率等情况
2.从房价的平均价格无法判断，因为所卖的所处的地理位置也不一样房子质量不一样，其底价是不一样的maybe
3.不合理的比较，十年前Fitch的卖房速度不如去年的Adams而推出前者不如后者是不公道的
附上我的提纲，加油！！