Argument180【0806G-永不言弃小组】第三次作业 by worldbaby

worldbabyUID: 2272889

Argument180【0806G-永不言弃小组】第三次作业 by worldbaby
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."

In this argument, by citing the two instances about the achievements made by two graduate from the Easy Read Speed-Reading course, and considering the fee paid for the class and the potential benefits received, the director's argument for requiring all of its employees to take the course in order to improve the company's productivity seems logical. However, as it stands, it suffers from several critical flaws as follows:
First of all, examples provided by the director are untenable and insufficient to support the conclusion drawn from it. On the one hand, the effectiveness demonstrated in the two examples are unwarranted. For the first graduate, although he can read a five-hundred -page report in the only two hours, it is doubted that whether he can indeed comprehend all the essential details of the report and master the significant information in such a short time. As to the second graduate, the key factors to one's promotion including the capability of communication , the ability of arranging tasks and more importantly the efficiency of productivity, without ruling out all those possible factors that may lead to the graduate's success, it is unreasonable to attribute his promotion to taking the course of Speed-reading. On the other hand, even if the two examples totally represent the function of the course, unless more cases are shown, the conclusion can not be warranted.  
Second, there is no evidence that taking part in the course will benefit the Acme Publishing Company if it adopted such recommendation. From the aforementioned situation, no solid information concerned the compelling need for the course. Maybe the average ability of speed-reading in the company is above the industry. What is more, if it is so, considering the fee potential fee paid by the company, whether it will be worthy is unmeasurable.  
Finally, even if the effectiveness of the course is true, whether requiring all of the employee to take such course is questionable, unless the director assume the demand of the course apply to all the employees. Apparently, employee in the company are in charge of different positions, who are requiring different kinds of ability, it is ridiculous that the cleaners in the company also need to take such course according to the logic reasoning of the director.  
To sum up, the argument lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lead to strong support to the arguer's claim. To make the claim logically acceptable, the arguer would have to provide more specific evidence concerning that effectiveness of the speed-read course and the need of it.