Argument 17 [076G飞跃小组] coraone 第二次作业

coraoneUID: 2233021

TOPIC: ARGUMENT17 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."
WORDS: 622          TIME: 上午 00:59:12          DATE: 2007-2-25

In this argument, by making a comparison between EZ Disposal (E) and ABC Waste ( A ) in the terms of charge, service and implement, the author asserts that Walnut Grove' s town council has made a mistake to switching from E to A.  To validate the conclusion, the author takes a result of a recent survey for example. All this seems sound and strong at the first glance. However, the author's process of identification suffers several underlying logical flaws.

As a threshold matter, the author indicates that, on contrary to A which collects trash once a week, in this point E is twice than A. Accordingly, the argument hinges on the presumption that E collects trash twice a week is necessary and efficiency in Walnut Grove. Yet, we are not informed what times of trash collection is the Walnut Grove's residents needed to keep their town nattiness and comfortable. It is entirely possible that one time per week is just enough. If this is the case, why should the council pay more 25% charges only for 100% more services which make on sense? On average, the council would not do this.

In my next analysis, should E would arrive at a higher stage of its provided services by the additional trucks which beside the owned 20 trucks both E and A? Yes, if these additional trucks of E will be serve for the Walnut Grove and its residents. Well, to a larger extent, none of these trucks E is going to use in Walnut Grove, but for extent its business in other places. Failed in offering a detail and persuasive information about these trucks by the author, so the answer is no.

In addition, even if these additional trucks which E is just ordered for Walnut Groves, it is not just the number of trucks that matters, but rather the efficiency of these implements. There is likelihood that the only twenty trucks are the up-to-date trucks, correspondingly, the one belong to E are all medieval and low-efficiency even including the additional trucks. The common sense informs us that if this is the case, the A is certainly a better choice. Lacking such a well-round reconsideration about this and other essential factors, the author can hardly make us trust his assertion.

In the final analyzing, the survey offered by the author cannot be as steadfast as it can act as a fundament to uphold the idea that the town residents are satisfied with the performance of E in the past 10 years. First, as we known, to be a well-established survey, it should include more detailed information than the author mentioned, such as the age-group, income, living condition, etc. of informant. People with different background hold different views on trash collection services. If one ignored all this important elements that would like to affect the consequence of the survey, the degree credit will of this survey will be undermined. Second, even through the survey is quite reliable, we still not are informed which whether the institution which conducts this survey is credible by the residents. Perhaps it is a profit-oriented institution, which used its so-called “survey” to advertise for its clients. So, It is entirely possible that most of the informant are whom uphold E.  Therefore, with these two points failed to clean up, the effectiveness of the survey in this argument will be undermined, so will the assertion.

In a nutshell, with a questionable comparison to prove a groundless assertion, this conclusion made by the author is certainly worth of suspecting. To better strengthen and fortify the argument, the author need to solve all these logical imperfections mentioned above; at least, lay more efficient and effective evidence to uphold his assertion.


严重超时-.-b晕额。。。请大家狠拍，必回拍，谢谢！加油！