【Flyer杀G作文组】第十四次作业7月18日Argument241-By afufu1124

afufu1124UID: 2786856

241. The following appeared in a memo at the XYZ company.
"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating resumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less-expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
难度：★★


Citing historical information of personnel firm Delany and Walsh in how well they have serve XYZ company and certain evidence about the scale of staff, number of branch offices, result of service, the speaker conclude that replacing Delany by Walsh is not a desirable suggestion for their company. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

To begin with, the argument assumes without justification that the service provided by Delany company is the only factor that contributes to higher rate of employment among those who accept the service. Nevertheless, chances are that those who accept the service might originally be of greater willingness to receive job-finding experience and advice from others including the personnel company, leaving them greater opportunities in finding new jobs eventually. Consequently, it is worthwhile and perhaps necessary for the speaker to reach beyond his rather limited scope of analysis and dig further for more convincing evidences that illustrate the irreplaceable utility offered by Delany.

Another problem with the argument lies in the comparison of work achievement between these two personnel firms. First, the speaker fail to mention about how many workers Delany serve compare to Walsh’s “only half” of employees eight years ago. Secondly, even if Delany help more employees to find their new places, the author arbitrarily presuppose that the social development conditions, including economic environment, are stable over the past eight years, thus Delany did a better job compared to how Walsh performed eight years ago. Thirdly, although it took Walsh’s clients more time to get jobs on average, there is not ground for the claim that Delany surpasses Walsh. As it turns out, the influence of other factors such as higher expectation from Walsh’s clients makes it harder to find jobs easily and quickly.

Finally, the most egregious reasoning error in the argument is that the bigger staff and larger number of branch offices are sufficient to reach the conclusion that Delany is superior. Unless it can be shown that in lack of scientific management and targeted strategy superior accomplishments can be achieved, this reasoning is dubious.

On balance, then, the recommendation of retaining Delany regardless of its higher payment relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render the assertion unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument the author would have to collect more information about how higher employment among clients necessarily is sufficient to show better performance of the company. To bolster the bigger staff and larger number of branch offices undoubtedly contribute to a superior company. Only doing so can it made a reasonable claim and most importantly, stand the test of time.

柏拉图的世界UID: 2581296

241. The following appeared in a memo at the XYZ company.
"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating resumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less-expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
难度：★★


Citing foregoing status historical information historical是历史学的，史实的，不贴切of personnel firms of Delany and Walsh in how well they have served XYZ company and certain evidence about the scale of staff, number of branch offices, result of service, the speaker conclude that replacing Delany by Walsh is not a desirable suggestion for their company. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

To begin with, the argument assumes without justification that the service provided by Delany company is the only factor that contributes to higher rate of employment among those who accept the service. Nevertheless, chances are  is that those who accept received the service might originally be of greater willingness to receive job-finding experience and advice from others including the personnel company, leaving them greater opportunities in finding new jobs eventually. Consequently, it is worthwhile and perhaps necessary for the speaker to reach beyond his rather limited scope of analysis and dig further for more convincing evidences that illustrate the irreplaceable utility offered by Delany.

Another problem with the argument lies in the comparison of work achievement between these two personnel firms. First, the speaker fail to mention about how many workers Delany serve compare to Walsh’s “only half” of employees eight years ago. Secondly, even if Delany help more employees to find their new places, the author arbitrarily presuppose that the social development conditions, including economic environment, are stable over the past eight years, thus Delany did a better job compared to how Walsh performed eight years ago. Thirdly, although it took Walsh’s clients more time to get jobs on average, there is not ground for the claim that Delany surpasses Walsh. As it turns out, the influence of other factors such as higher expectation from Walsh’s clients makes it harder to find jobs easily and quickly.

Finally, the most egregious这个词重了 reasoning error in the argument is that the bigger staff and larger number of branch offices are sufficient to reach the conclusion that Delany is superior. Unless it can be shown that in lack of scientific management and targeted strategy superior accomplishments can be achieved, this reasoning is dubious.

On balance, on balance不应该用在这里吧？ then, the recommendation of retaining Delany regardless of its higher payment relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render the assertion unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument the author would have tocould你是提出了几种可行方法而已，不建议说have to，或者only什么的 collect more information about how higher employment among clients necessarily is sufficient to show better performance of the company. To bolster the bigger staff and larger number of branch offices undoubtedly contribute to a superior company. Only doing so can it made a reasonable claim and most importantly, stand the test of time.