ARGUMENT233 by 晓航【我们的小组】

zhangxiaohang1UID: 2705669

ARGUMENT233 - The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls throughout the country.

"The surface of a section of Route 101, paved two years ago by McAdam Road Builders, is now badly cracked and marred by dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 66, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. Appian Roadways has recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery, and it has hired a new quality-control manager. Because of its superior work and commitment to quality, we should contract with Appian Roadways rather than McAdam Road Builders to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls."
WORDS: 436          TIME: 00:58:41          DATE: 2010-7-26 19:33:22

The vice president's conclusion that Appian Roadways (AR) is better than McAdam Road Builders (MARB) in building our new shopping malls' access roads is lacking of evidence and the comparison between MARB and AR is incomplete. In addition, other important parts between MARB and AR haven't been compared by the vice president.
Firstly, the comparison between MARB and AR is not a fairful comparison which can convince me his opinion. The climate of the places of Route 101 and Route 66 and their traffic flows are not mentioned in this memo. These informations are important when comparing their works. With a much more heavy traffic flow and bad weather the road's condition is easily to become worse. What's worse, after finished their works the maintenance of these two roads are not given. Which company maintains these roads and how their works are are also important for the roads' condition. How much you took on the maintanence of the roads and the outside environments determine the roads condition period time after the builder finished them.
Secondly, the fact that AR recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery and hired a new quality-contril manager is useless in vice president's logical chain. The vice president hasn’t provided similar information about MARB; whether MARB also purchased new machinery and hired a new quality-contril manager is not clear. Furthermore, the fact may not contribute to AR's improvement. Most important one is whether the new quality-control manager is fit for AR and so is the machinery. A new employee especially a new manager needs a lot of time to get familiar to his work. In this period, the company's works' quality may not be improved or could be a little decrease.
Finally, granted that AR's works' quality is better than MARB's in building a road or a highway, whether it's the same situation in building access roads for malls is open to doubt. Everyone knows the access roads are much smaller than the highways. What's more, their materials, designs and construction methods are different. With such a big differece between access road and highway, it's difficult to say that AR will do a better work than MARB in our tasks.
In sum, the vice president has a good intention, but his argument are lacking of evidence and useful comparison between MARB and AR. To further bolster the argument the vice president must provid better evidence, perhaps more detailed information about these two companies and their works espeacially works on access road to mall. And whether there is the third building company which is better than the two mentioned above is need to be concerned.

richardleecod6UID: 2759051

感觉楼主写的不错啊~~~虽然时间超出了很多，但逻辑和基本事实都说清楚了。

楼主的论证思路跟XDF老师讲的很像~~~如果楼主不是新饭请无视我~~

鄙人今天才开始写A，写了A135，半个小时才弄了240多字，两个论点，看的自己想砸电脑~~~I还没碰呢~~~

抱歉，没能你什么实质性的意见，因为鄙人也是菜鸟~~

楼主加油！