argument117 同主题 互拍吧

clearbabyUID: 2114410

------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：40分11秒     515 words
从2005年6月28日9时58分到2005年6月28日10时40分
------题目------
The 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.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer recommends that office--supply departments will become the most profitable component of the stores due to increase the stock of home office machines and office supplies. To substantiate the argument, the arguer cites a recent survey which showed that most respondents reported that they are required to take more work home than they were in the past. Meanwhile, to further justify this recommendation, the arguer points out that Valu--Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office--supply department in the past. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat logical. A careful examination of it, nonetheless, hardly can the reasoning be valid if only on the strength of this evidence.

In the first place, the survey is too vague to believe. On one hand, we are not informed how many people are chosen in the survey. Over 70 percent is not convincing number. If the amount of surveyed people is too small, it is impossible to make a sound conclusion. On the other hand, the samples cited were mostly required to take more work home, while suggestive of this, is insufficient to warrant the truth because there is no reason to believe that the survey is representative of the whole groups. For example, it is likely that the people reported in the survey had lower working efficiency or were too old, they could not accomplish their work in the limiting time, so there are no choices for them but only taking them home. If so, maybe 1000 subjects were chosen but no more than 10 were valid. The conclusion would be highly suspectable.

In addition, the arguer depends on the gratuitous assumption that office--supply department will become the most profitable component only through increasing the stock of home office machines and office supplies. Actually, it is no necessary the case. Because the arguer ignores other more important problems which are relative to the profits. For instance, profits can be decided by the methods the department used, also can be influenced by whether the supply and need are on balance, and so on. So the arguer' s conclusion is invalid on this evidence.

Finally, even though we granted that there are more people taking work home, it is arbitrary for the arguer to draw the conclusion that the need of home office machines and office supplies is certainly increasing. There are other possibilities that their 'homework' is not as complicated as theirs in office. Perhaps at home, they only need to write some report or classify the statistics. If so, there is no need to buy home office machines and office supplies. So the mere fact they are required to take more work home is insufficient to gain the result that increasing the stock of home office machines and office supplies can bring profits.

To sum up, this argument is not well reasoning and lacks credibility because the evidence quoted in the analysis does not support what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more valid, the arguer needs to make more effective and representative survey, such as the amount of surveyed people and so on,  to support this argument.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-7-29 at 00:17 ]

clearbabyUID: 2114410

ding

快乐的忧郁着UID: 2112574

In this argument, the arguer recommends that office--supply departments will become the most profitable component of the stores due to increase the stock of home office machines and office supplies. To substantiate the argument, the arguer cites a recent survey which showed that most respondents reported that they are required to take more work home than they were in the past. Meanwhile, to further justify this recommendation, the arguer points out that Valu--Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office--supply department in the past. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat logical. A careful examination of it, nonetheless, hardly can the reasoning be valid if only on the strength of this evidence.(经典模板，但是坛子上说这种新东方八婆似的开局不好，我和你一样，也使用这种开局，想突破又突破不了，呵呵，其实最好写的有点新意)
In the first place, the survey is too vague to believe. On one hand, we are not informed how many people are chosen in the survey. Over 70 percent is not （a）convincing number. If the amount of surveyed people is too small, it is impossible to make a sound conclusion. （第一个攻击点没有深入，应该再探讨一下就好了）On the other hand, the samples cited were mostly required to take more work home, while suggestive of this, is insufficient to warrant the truth because there is no reason to believe that the survey is representative of the whole groups. For example, it is likely that the people reported in the survey had lower working efficiency or were too old, they could not accomplish their work in the limiting time, so there are no choices for them but only taking them home. If so, maybe 1000 subjects were chosen but no more than 10 were valid. （第二个攻击点很developed）The conclusion would be highly suspectable.

In addition, the arguer（argument） depends on the gratuitous assumption that office--supply department will become the most profitable component only through increasing the stock of home office machines and office supplies. Actually, it is no necessary the case.（前面已经说gratuitous，后面就不用这局了吧） Because the arguer ignores other more important problems which are relative to the profits. For instance, profits can be decided by the methods the department used, also can be influenced by whether the supply and need are on balance, and so on. So the arguer' s conclusion is invalid on this evidence.

Finally, even though we granted that there are more people taking work home, it is arbitrary for the arguer to draw the conclusion that the need of home office machines and office supplies is certainly increasing. There are other possibilities that their 'homework' is not as complicated as theirs in office. Perhaps at home, they only need to write some report or classify the statistics. If so, there is no need to buy home office machines and office supplies. So the mere fact they are required to take more work home is insufficient to gain the result that increasing the stock of home office machines and office supplies can bring profits.（没有深入展开论证，应该再developed一些）
To sum up, this argument is not well reasoning and lacks credibility because the evidence quoted in the analysis does not support what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more valid, the arguer needs to make more effective and representative survey, such as the amount of surveyed people and so on,  to support this argument.（呵呵又是经典模板）
架构很清晰明了，就是论证不怎么深入，应该再多说几个可能性或多做几个让步，把对方驳的体无完肤。嘿嘿。。。三点。。

语言不错，继续加油努力吧！

clearbabyUID: 2114410

恩，谢谢，开头结尾我会再改进的~~