argument178 51互助组 by ruczephyr

ruczephyrUID: 2181202

题目：ARGUMENT178 - The following appeared in the annual report from the president of the National Brush Company.

"In order to save money, we at the National Brush Company have decided to pay our employees for each brush they produce instead of for the time they spend producing brushes. We believe that this policy will lead to the production of more and better brushes, will allow us to reduce our staff size, and will enable the company factories to operate for fewer hours-resulting in savings on electricity and security costs. These changes will ensure that the best workers keep their jobs and that the company will earn a profit in the coming year."
字数：636           用时：未知          日期：2007-7-11 11:04:33

The passage is presented to claim that the National Brush Company will choose to pay employees for each brush produced rather than for the time they work, which will ensure the best workers have their position and increase the profit in the coming year. To substantiate the point, the author provides evidences that such changes will increase both the quality and quantity of the production, reduce their number of staff, and save great amount of expense on electricity and security. In-depth scrutiny upon such evidences reveals it still suffers from several fallacies as follows.

First and foremost, the author's claim is made on the basis of an assumption that this policy has an effect to increase both the quality and the quantity of the production of brushes. Yet, there is no information to have this assumption verified. It is possible that enticed by higher salary, most of the workers produce more brushes than ever before, however, they place no emphasis on the quality of their work. In other words, the policy might not lead to a production of better brushes, though the quantity of the production might be large enough. If this is the case, these group of workers should not be called best workers, whereas they still keep their position. In consequence, such changes would not work to ensure the best workers as the president has imagined.

What is more, the present evidences can not serve to validate that the profit for the company will definitely increase in the coming year. As profit has close relation with both income and expense, the author merely mentions that the new policy will reduce the cost on electricity and security, however, he does not testify that the expense of material for producing brush does not increase as well. It is equally possible that other fees such as tax, or transporting fee are growing up significantly, which seriously undermines the profit for the company. Or even though regardless the possible increasing expense for producing brushes, the suspicion that the quality of brushes led by these changes would reduce not only their sales but also the price of the brush. Therefore, for the potential increase of expense and decrease of income, the author fails to convince me to believe that the profit of the company will indeed increase in the coming year.

In addition, whether the policy might work to reduce the staff size and save cost on electricity and security is still open to doubt. To reduce the size of staff, the company needs to enact certain rules to regulate the employees-better work is praised and worse work is punished or even deported from the company. However, the author does not include anything to have this point confirmed. The reality might reveal that  none of the poor working employees are evicted out of the company, as a result the policy can not serve to reduce the staff size. Moreover, the author unfairly claims that the company will operate with fewer hours which would decrease the use of electricity and security. Perhaps, on the one hand, to pursue for a larger production, the company still work, if not longer than, as long as they did ever before, so naturally the cost spent on security might not reduce as the author's claim. On the other hand, larger number of production requires more net working time for the machines,  which will consume more electricity than the company did before the changes. Without any information to infer that the price of electricity would drop, the fact that the new policy will reduce the amount of electricity and security cost is still under suspicion.

In brief, the argument is made on the basis of several ungrounded evidences, to better improve the argument, the author needs to provides information to verify all the suspicions above.

coalaxixiUID: 2353397

The passage is presented toclaim that the National Brush Company will choose to pay employees foreach brush produced rather than for the time they work, which willensure the best workers have their position and increase the profit inthe coming year. To substantiate the point, the author providesevidences that such changes will increase both the quality and quantityof the production, reduce their number of staff, and save great amountof expense on electricity and security. In-depth scrutiny upon suchevidences reveals it (it 在这里指代什么？"the claim") still suffers from several fallacies as follows.

First and foremost, theauthor's claim is made on the basis of an(the, 后面有定语从句) assumption that this policyhas an effect to increase both the quality and the quantity of theproduction of brushes. Yet, there is no information to have thisassumption verified. It is possible that enticed by higher salary, mostof the workers produce more brushes than ever before, however, theyplace no emphasis on the quality of their work. In other words, thepolicy might not lead to a production of better brushes, though thequantity of the production might be large enough. If this is the case,these group of workers should not be called best workers, whereas theystill keep their position (what is the logic between this sentence and your topic sentence in this paragraph? you are going to show the weakness of "quality and quantity" claimed, however, you related to another mistake of the argument, although it is a mistake. For your next sentence, it is also diversed. what I suggest is either to add some words in your topics sentence or move these to a seperate paragraph.). In consequence, such changes would not workto ensure the best workers as the president has imagined.

What is more, the presentevidences can not serve to validate that the profit for the companywill definitely increase in the coming year. As profit has closerelation with both income and expense, the author merely mentions thatthe new policy will reduce the cost on electricity and security,however, he does not testify that the expense of material for producingbrush does not increase as well. It is equally possible that other feessuch as tax, or transporting fee are growing up significantly, whichseriously undermines the profit for the company. Or even thoughregardless the possible increasing expense for producing brushes, thesuspicion that the quality of brushes led by these changes would reducenot only their sales(this makes sense) but also the price(this does not, or not directly well understanding) of the brush. Therefore, forthe potential increase of expense and decrease of income, the authorfails to convince me to believe that the profit of the company willindeed increase in the coming year.

In addition, whether thepolicy might work to reduce the staff size and save cost on electricityand security is still open to doubt. To reduce the size of staff, thecompany needs to enact certain rules to regulate the employees-betterwork is praised and worse work is punished or even deported from thecompany(if this is your claim, people could also argu with you). However, the author does not include anything to have thispoint confirmed. The reality might reveal that  none of the poorworking employees are evicted out of the company, as a result thepolicy can not serve to reduce the staff size. Moreover, the authorunfairly claims that the company will operate with fewer hours whichwould decrease the use of electricity and security. Perhaps, on the onehand, to pursue for a larger production, the company still work, if notlonger than, as long as they did ever before, so naturally the costspent on security might not reduce as the author's claim. On the otherhand, larger number of production requires more net working time forthe machines,  which will consume more electricity than the company didbefore the changes. Without any information to infer that the price ofelectricity would drop, the fact that the new policy will reduce theamount of electricity and security cost is still under suspicion.

In brief, the argument ismade on the basis of several ungrounded evidences, to better improvethe argument, the author needs to provides information to verify allthe suspicions above.

comments:
1. a very good argument, especially some excellent words and a diversity of sentence structures.
2. good at finding the fallacies of the original argument
3. it would be better if you could organize your points into more logical order and structure. Specifically, you are discussing expense and income in your second point(3rd paragraph), while you are discussing the electricity and security cost, which is again a part of expense. One alternative is, putting expense in one paragraph, and profit in another.
4. about sentence and phrase structures, probably too many fancy sturctures would harm, say,  you make a lot use of "have sth done", while one or two would be pretty good, it would harm if you use anywhere. The point is, to use the language properly.

good luck!


[ 本帖最后由 coalaxixi 于 2007-7-12 06:25 编辑 ]

lulu花开UID: 2351079

开头部分  新东方式八卦开头。。。
其实开头不重要  你可以看到ETS范文中很多  用的都是很简单的开头或者根本没有开头
这样也许可以节省时间，让你能够在后面的部分展开论述。

感觉论证的三段中，第二段和第三段到底哪段该摆在前面呢？值得思考。

xbcperceptionUID: 2309800

这篇文章很不错啊，每段它因找的都很全面，而且也比较合理，没有牵强的感觉，就是开头有点模版化，至于攻击点顺序的问题我个人认为没必要过于强调，不过第二个攻击点与第三个攻击点换下位置可能要符合题目顺序一些吧，

hotmailcjUID: 2253862

感觉coalaxixi英文水平肯定不一般，可以很地道地表达出自己的思维