Argument1-5提纲 [Chasing For "6" Score]第二次作业

stonesundlutUID: 2235257

1The following appeared in a memorandum written by the vice president of Nature's Way, a chain of stores selling health food and other health-related products.

"Previous experience has shown that our stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives. We should therefore build our next new store in Plainsville, which has many such residents. Plainsville merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs. The local health club, which nearly closed five years ago due to lack of business, has more members than ever, and the weight training and aerobics classes are always full. We can even anticipate a new generation of customers: Plainsville's schoolchildren are required to participate in a 'fitness for life' program, which emphasizes the benefits of regular exercise at an early age."

In this argument, the arguer recommends that Nature’s Way should build its next new store in Plainville due to the residents’ concern with the leading healthy lives. This recommendations is based on the previous experience has shown that our stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives and that Plainville has many such residents. Meanwhile, to further justify this claim, the arguer points out that the local health club has more members than ever and the weight training and aerobics classes are always full. Furthermore, Plainville merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time high. At first glance, this argument seems very convincing, but a careful examination of it, would reveal how groundless it is.
1。赚钱的前提是收益高出成本，论断没有提供关于在此地开店的成本的计算。
2。那些参加健身活动的人不一定关心饮食健康，所以不必然的成为他们的顾客。
3。就算他们关心健康饮食，那么当地相同商家没有被考虑进去，竞争以及品牌忠实度的问题。
4。他们在关心健康的地区赢利的原因没有说，健康也许不是他们的卖点也许是别的东西。
To sum up, the argument is not well reasoning and lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lead to strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to prove that the resident’s highly concern with leading healthy lives will lead to buying more related products and most of them will be the customers of N.W.
------------------------------

2The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
论断：同一外观就能提高地价。
1。这是他人经验，尽管离得很近，但是否适用于该地很可疑。论断没有就两地在交通，功能以及住户特点等问题比较异同，做出结论显得仓促。
2。他地区地价提高不一定是因为同一外观。七年发生了很多变化，交通，商业区，社区内部设施提高了。论断 is one-handed.
3。地价要提高，得有更多人住进来。同一外观抹煞个性，会引人反感。且不论统一得外观能不能得到所有人满意，这种做法本身有强制性。
结论，要听取用户得经验，做更多的调查研究。
------------------------------

3The following appeared in a newspaper article about law firms in the city of Megalopolis.

"In Megalopolis, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usually offer much higher salaries, law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely because they experience greater job satisfaction at smaller firms. In a survey of first-year students at a leading law school, most agreed with the statement that earning a high salary was less important to them than job satisfaction. This finding suggests that the large, corporate firms of Megalopolis will need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work."


论断：大公司向毕业生提供更多的福利，激励并减少工作时间，就能吸收毕业生来工作。该论断的前提是与小公司相比，大公司虽然有高工资，但不能提供高的工作满意度，从而失去了毕业生。
1。论断的前提很可疑。即进大公司工作的毕业生减少15％是否是毕业生选择的问题，而不是大公司在录用时的问题。大公司的工作复杂，内部竞争激烈，很有可能是他们提高了门槛。
2。论断引用一个在大一学生里的调查做论据不合适。大一学生与毕业生之间的区别是显而易见的：专业知识少，思考问题不成熟，没有生存压力，更重要的是他们当时并不面临择业。
3。论断没有提供学生对所谓工作满意的内容应该包括那些方面，是不是仅仅是福利激励以及工作时间少，还是有其他的内容，比如工资高，发展机会多，工作环境。比如这样，单纯论断并不能提高工作满意度进而吸引学生。小公司的确有优势是大公司没有的，比如工作环境简单，新人与老板之间的沟通，较早的承担重任等等。
结论：论断方法当然会增加一份工作的吸引力，但没有证据证明它们是最根本或最主要的原因。而且论断忽视了最根本的问题就是大公司的需求，另外应该调查更相关的一些人。
------------------------------

4The 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."


In this argument, the arguer advocates that people should use Adams to sell his home quickly and at a good price. This recommendation is based on the comparison that Adams has 40 real estate agents, while Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Furthermore, 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, and homes listed with Adams sell faster as well. This argument is problematic for lots of reasons.
首先，找好的代理公司不一定能保证卖房快，房价高，房子自身的特点最关键。
其次，A的年收入多，但是它的员工多，平均下来可能效率很低。而且平均价格没有说服力，房子还需分类。
最后，个人的经历忽略了一个很重要的问题，9年的时间，不仅房地产业会发生很大的变化，科技的发展，社会的需求也在变化。另外，他两处房子的差别也在变化。
To sum up, this argument seems reasonable and has many evidences, but its conclusion is dogmatic and unfair. In order to evaluate two real estate firms, the arguer should give us more details such as the work efficiency, and the knowledge about the market. What is more important to sell the house is not only to find a good agent but also to position one’s own house appropriately.
------------------------------

5The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.

"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis."
In this argument, the arguer concludes that Perkins Pharmaceuticals will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company due to its new product called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis. To support this conclusion, the arguer points out that arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, and the patent on Xenon which is the main competitor’s product expires in three years. The argument suffers from several critical fallacies.
1.Xy会赚钱，没有直接资料显示。首先，研究说它有效但没说人们愿意用它；其次治疗严重的病也许不适合一般的病症，因为在几千万的患者中严重的一般来说是少数。如果在普通病症上X比Xy有效，就有可能X仍然被广泛应用。
2.BP公司不赚钱。没有直接资料证明BP公司的利润肯定下降，首先，他们可以再推出新药，只要他们有研究的力量，能够推出受欢迎的新药，就能继续有专利进而获得市场；其次，专利没了，他们也可以降价，别的公司不一定比他们便宜；第三，病人如果仍然认可他们的药，他们将还有很大的市场。
还有其他的公司，未来几年里完全可能出现新的公司和新的技术。
The arguer only makes a stop at the appearance of the material, and does not have a sufficient research. So the analysis is lack of persuasiveness.