arguement180-Spring0806第4次作业

atshineUID: 2411331

TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
WORDS: 354         TIME: 01:11:28          DATE: 2007/11/17 20:28:23

   According to the facts, many other companies recently stated that the employees who have taken the Easy Read Speed--Reading Course improved productivity and small price to pay for the seminar, the author claims that Acme will benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course. Obviously, this conclusion has logical mistakes.
    To begin with, the author fails to prove convincing evidence to support the efficiency of taking ER course. First, it is unbelievable for a person to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours. Even if one can do it, the reading quality must be suspected. Second, many factors influence the affair that the assistant manager rose to vice president within a year after ER course. The author ignores other possibilities, such as outstanding management skills, diligence, humble, and honest of this assistant manager, expanding the advantage of ER course. Third, the author simply equates "read" with "absorb". If you read faster than average, meanwhile, you can absorb all you have read; you will master more information on such condition. Admittedly, no one has such fabulous memory.
     Also, the author lists another justification to support his recommendation that ER costs only $500 per employee including a three -week seminar and a lifelong subscription to ER newsletter--a small price to pay when consider the benefits to Acme. However , this comparison base on an improved  assumption that whether the ER course can bring in more benefits than those Acme spend on. It is seriously weak the author's argument.
     Moreover, even if ER course exactly bring in great benefits to Acme, and the expenditure is insignificant compared to profitability, the conclusion the author hold is still unfounded. It is unnecessary to require every Acme's employees to take the ER course. Should a cleaner need to spend a long time on intensifying reading skill instead? The answer is uncountable--NO! Such action leads unnecessary cost and wastes management and personnel source.
    In brief, the author should provide more evidences to demonstrate that take ER course get more benefits than the source spent on. And the author should analysis the representative condition of Acme comprehensively.

写的很仓促,请多指教~!