为我所用，第九次，argument117

小猪sisiUID: 2453484

117The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.

"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they
are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they
were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its
office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this
work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home
office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and
fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper,
pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will
become the most profitable component of our stores."
字数：532  时间：30   04-02-2008

The arguer asserts that they should increase stock of both home office machines and
some office supplies to help the office-supply departments to be the most profitable
component of their stores for the reason that according to a survey that 70% report that
they take more work home with them from workplace than they were in the past. The argument
seems to be sound and convincing at first glance, however, if suffers several fallacies
when taken into further consideration.

First and foremost, the arguer makes the conclusion that there is an increase in working
home than before by the survey. However, the arguer fails to prove the quality of the
survey: Do it involve enough people to conclude and do these people investigated could
represent the common people's opinion. Thus, if the arguer could not show any information
or evidence to substantiate the quality of the survey, there is no way that he could conclude
from the survey.

Furthermore, the arguer implies that the increasing tendency, it there is any, would be
constant in the nest few years. Nevertheless, the argument does not relate any information
about that. If it is the case, it is extremely possible that because lots of people complain
about working at home, the government plans to carry out an law to regulate the hours that
employees work at home. Consequently, the tendency that the arguer supposes would never happen
or even run reversely. In addition, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that
although people spent more time to work at home than before, they would not buy any office
supplies or machines because they only need to do some paper work on computers rather
than fax things, printing papers or copying paper. Therefore, unless the arguer supplies
sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the tendency of an rising hours in working home would constant
and people would prefer to buy home office machines ,the argument could not be logically proper.

Finally, the arguer expects the office-supply department to be the most profitable
component of their stores; however, this would not happen even if the tendency of working
home is constant. It could be the reason that
the arguer's company would pay much more to purchase home office machines than to purchase
office machines because the high quality standard of the home office machine makes them
cost much more to produce and hard to preserve. As consequence, though the stores would earn more
than before but they cost much more, and then the profits plan would never achieved.
Therefore, the arguer should do more researches on the market of home office products before he makes the
decision.

After pointing out so many flaws above, we could say that the arguer's statement is highly
dubious and unacceptable. To better recommend the argument, we should be offered
much more information about the quality of the survey and much more evidence that
suggests that the tendency of an increasing in buying home office machines is exist and people
would need to purchase some home office machines and supplies.
To better bolster the argument, the arguer should have to provide more precise information to
aid him to make the feasible plan.

[ 本帖最后由 小猪sisi 于 2008-4-2 18:35 编辑 ]

jenniferganUID: 2443583

The arguer asserts that they should increase stock of both home office machines and
some office supplies to help the office-supply departments to be the most profitable
component of their stores for the reason that according to a survey that 70% report that
they take more work home with them from workplace than they were in the past. The argument
seems to be sound and convincing at first glance, however, if suffers several fallacies
when taken into further consideration.

First and foremost, the arguer makes the conclusion that there is an increase in working
home than before by the survey. However, the arguer fails to prove the quality of the
survey: Do(does) it involve enough people to conclude and do these people investigated could
represent the common people's opinion. Thus, if the arguer could not show any information
or evidence to substantiate the quality of the survey, there is no way that he could conclude
from the survey.

Furthermore, the arguer implies that the increasing tendency, it there is any, would be
constant in the nest(next) few years. Nevertheless, the argument does not relate any information
about that. If it is the case, it is extremely possible that because lots of people complain
about working at home, the government plans to carry out an law to regulate the hours that
employees work at home. Consequently, the tendency that the arguer supposes would never happen
or even run reversely. In addition, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that
although people spent more time to work at home than before, they would not buy any office
supplies or machines because they only need to do some paper work on computers rather
than fax things, printing papers or copying paper. Therefore, unless the arguer supplies
sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the tendency of an rising hours in working home would constant
and people would prefer to buy home office machines ,the argument could not be logically proper.

Finally, the arguer expects the office-supply department to be the most profitable
component of their stores; however, this would not happen even if the tendency of working
home is constant. It could be the reason that
the arguer's company would pay much more to purchase home office machines than to purchase
office machines because the high quality standard of the home office machine makes them
cost much more to produce and hard to preserve. As consequence, though the stores would earn more
than before but they cost much more, and then the profits plan would never achieved.
Therefore, the arguer should do more researches on the market of home office products before he makes the
decision.

After pointing out so many flaws above, we could say that the arguer's statement is highly
dubious and unacceptable. To better recommend the argument, we should be(去掉) offered
much more information about the quality of the survey and much more evidence that
suggests that the tendency of an increasing in buying home office machines is exist and people
would need to purchase some home office machines and supplies.
To better bolster the argument, the arguer should have to provide more precise information to
aid him to make the feasible plan.

错误找得挺好的，语言有待加强

ellisUID: 2256846

The arguer asserts that they should increase stock of both home office machines and
some office supplies to help the office-supply departments to be the most profitable
component of their stores for the reason that according to a survey that 70% report that
they take more work home with them from workplace than they were in the past. The argument
seems to be sound and convincing at first glance, however, if suffers several fallacies
when taken into further consideration.

First and foremost, the arguer makes the conclusion that there is an increase in working
home than before by the survey. However, the arguer fails to prove the quality of the
survey: Do it involve enough people to conclude and do these people investigated could
represent the common people's opinion. Thus, if the arguer could not show any information
or evidence to substantiate the quality of the survey, there is no way that he could conclude
from the survey.

Furthermore, the arguer implies that the increasing tendency, it there is any, would be
constant in the nest few years. Nevertheless, the argument does not relate any information
about that. If it is the case, it is extremely possible that because lots of people complain
about working at home, the government plans to carry out an law to regulate the hours that
employees work at home. Consequently, the tendency that the arguer supposes would never happen
or even run reversely. In addition, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that
although people spent more time to work at home than before, they would not buy any office
supplies or machines because they only need to do some paper work on computers rather
than fax things, printing papers or copying paper. Therefore, unless the arguer supplies
sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the tendency of an rising hours in working home would constant
and people would prefer to buy home office machines ,the argument could not be logically proper.

Finally, the arguer expects the office-supply department to be the most profitable
component of their stores; however, this would not happen even if the tendency of working
home is constant. It could be the reason that
the arguer's company would pay much more to purchase home office machines than to purchase
office machines because the high quality standard of the home office machine makes them
cost much more to produce and hard to preserve. As consequence, though the stores would earn more
than before but they cost much more, and then the profits plan would never achieved.
Therefore, the arguer should do more researches on the market of home office products before he makes the
decision.

After pointing out so many flaws above, we could say that the arguer's statement is highly
dubious and unacceptable. To better recommend the argument, we should be offered
much more information about the quality of the survey and much more evidence that
suggests that the tendency of an increasing in buying home office machines is exist and people
would need to purchase some home office machines and supplies.
To better bolster the argument, the arguer should have to provide more precise information to
aid him to make the feasible plan.

错误找的很全,而且基本没什么语法或拼写错误