argument210 欢迎拍砖

globinUID: 2124857

In this letter, the author claims that robots could be used more and more in the factory work due to its much more effectively, efficiently, and profitably than its counterpart in human beings. To bolster his assertion, the arguer points out the successful use of robots in exploring outer space in the past, he also notes some other priorities which robots have over human factory workers.  However, after revealing its well disguised veil composed of ostensible logical ratiocination and convincing citations, we will find the argument greatly suffers a series of unsubstantiated assumptions and is subsequently unpersuasive as it stands.

A threshold problem hide in the argument is that the author assumes what might be a fault false analogy between the outer space and the factory working. In order to conclude the robots' working in factory is successful, he must assume all the relevant circumstances involving this two working conditions are essentially the same. Yet no evidence is presented to prove the case. The concrete factors such as the working systems and mechanisms, the working ambience are of great difference. Thus, since the argument fails to supply these factors, I can not accept the assumption that these two situations are equal with each other.

Another point worthy considering lies in the asserted several advantages robots have. Firstly, the arguer considers using the robots would reduce absenteeism for they never get sick. However, I can not admit this situation because we know the structure inside the robots can be very complicated. It contains a myriad of various kinds of fragments and parts, which can break down easily, thus factually robots are easy to have an error during its working hours. Besides, the author asserts robots do not make mistakes. But he overlooks the possibility that when the electric circuits in the robots have mistakes or some other accidents that bring about the robots' break down, they ineluctably make lots of mistakes, let alone they can increase their output.  In addition, the argument also claims if robots are in use, the morale of factory workers can be improved for many worker would shift to more interesting kinds of tasks due to the boring nature of these factory works. Yet no evidence are offered to justify this assumptions, nor does the author can make me highly credulous that the workers have a conspicuous motive to shift to more interesting tasks. Absent evidence to support the assumption, it is highly possible that the actual fact maybe the adverse situation: A large amount of robots occupied the work originally take by the human workers could cause them extreme discontent because of their losing works and accordingly decrease their morale.

Last but not least, since all of the factors mentioned above can not be rule out by the argument, the author can not confidently concludes robots can perform factory work effectively and efficiently. Moreover, the author also refers that robots can work profitably than human workers meanwhile. However I cannot think he can draw this assertion for the possibility that he neglect a lot of other factors influencing the value of profit. Perhaps the expense in the construction and fixation of the robots are very high. Without account for this alternative condition, the author can not make the right conclusion of the high profit the factory can gain if it use the robot workers.

In conclusion, the author's projection is simply indefensible, at least based on the argument due to several weak grounds. To better validate his assertion, the author must supply the examples and foresight that using robots in the factory can be a success. Also he must point out other situations in which the robots can overwhelmingly surpass the human workers.




617words, error 23 words.
Time: 18:43(6)-19:35, 2005-8-16

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-17 at 01:47 ]