argument117 决战830拍砖组™"8月25日作业 同主题高频狂练,请兄弟们狂拍

momo56288860UID: 191433

Argument117  第25篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：52分45秒     396words
从2005年7月25日10时29分到2005年7月25日11时52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 the argument, the arguer concludes that Valu-Mart should increase the stock of home office machine and office supplies and Valu-Mart`s office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our srores. What the arguer analyze in the argument seems reasonable, however, the argument suffers from several fallacies.

In the first place, the survey is doubtful. The arguer fails to offer the detail in those respondents. whether those respondents will likely to buy home office machine and office supplies does not mention in the argument although 70 percent of the respondents needed to take more work home with them from workplace than they were in the past. Furthermore, the fact that 70 percent of the respondents took more work home with them does not mean that most people will need to take work home. It is quite possible that 70 percent of the respondents who needed to take more work home is just a few proportion of all people. Without ruling out the possibility, the arguer can not draw a further conclusion.

In the second place, granted that 70 percent of the respondents needed to take more work home, there is  no guarateen that they will purchase home office machine and office supplies of office-supply departments. It is also possible that other department of Valu-Mart will also increase the stock of home office machine and office supplies, hence there is not sure that the potential clients will buy  home office machine and office supplies from office-supply departments. Without excluding the possibility, the conclusion that office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our srores is arbitrary.

Lase but not least, the arguer fails to mention the reason that why not office-supply departments is  profitable. It is quite possible that the worse service and wore reputation of office-supply departments lead the customers loosing the confidence on office-supply departments, and thus lead to the  sale`s decline of office-supply departments on home office machine and office supplies. Before finding the real reason of  the  sale`s decline, what the arguer maintain is un warranted.

In conclusion, the argument lacks credibility because the proof quoted in the construe can lend less support to what the arguer insists. To convice us, the arguer needs to provide more evidence concerning the status of customer and bad profitable reasons of  office-supply departments.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-26 at 11:48 ]

nanziUID: 2126362

我今天也写了这篇啊，
下午帮你改，然后再发上来。
占位^_^

zhaomin001UID: 2126133

zhaomin001UID: 2126133

In this argument, the manager asserts that the office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of Valu-Mart by increasing their stock of office supplies . To substantiate this recommendation, the manager cites a relevant survey and claims that Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past. However, the arguer fails to convince me for the fallacies  this argument suffers as following.
In the first place, the survey could not directly lead to the conclusion that there is a work-at-home trends. Possibly , most of the respondents are people who hate to take work home, and consequently ,they will manage to reduce the amount of work taken home gradually ,therefore, no more office-supplies are needed in future. Besides, the credibility of this survey is also in doubt. For the reason that maybe only people who often take work home respond to the survey to show their dissatisfy and complaint while people who are free from work at home are reluctant to spend time on such survey. Furthermore, as the survey suggests, the work taken home is more than that in past. The arguer makes a hasty generalization by asserting that the amount of taken-home work will increase sharply without taking the amount in the past into consideration.

In the second place, the manager suffers an incomplete thought. He claims by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines and office supplies ,they will make profits. He overlooked the possibility that the work taken home may not be office work but crafty , in that these office machines and supplies are useless for the people with work at home . Also, profits are involved with revenue and cost , to increase the stock means to increase cost. How can we know increased revenue will  overpass the cost increased?
The last but not the least, the manager confuses an  comparison and a variation . Without knowing how are the other departments are doing in terms of profit, we can not conclude that the office-supply department will become the most profitable component of their stores.
Simply put, this argument can not convince me that to increase the stock of office machines and supplies will make the office-supplies apartment the most profitable component of the store. Unless the manager proceeds to present more evidence to show the credibility of the survey and there being no exclusive reasons can take responsibility for the poor sales of that department with the economic condition of other department as well.

nanziUID: 2126362

In the argument, the arguer concludes that Valu-Mart should increase the stock of home office machine and office supplies and Valu-Mart`s office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our srores. What the arguer analyze in the argument seems reasonable, however, the argument suffers from several fallacies. （开头段不错。不过我觉得第一段应该简略提一下作者的论据，比如加上based on a dubious survey之类的。）

In the first place, the survey is doubtful. The arguer fails to offer the detail （details） in those respondents. whether those respondents will (少了be) likely to buy home office machine and office supplies does (does改为is) not mention in the argument although 70 percent of the respondents needed to take more work home with them from workplace than they were in the past. Furthermore, the fact that 70 percent of the respondents took more work home with them does not mean that most people will need to take work home. It is quite possible that 70 percent of the respondents who needed to take more work home is just a few proportion of all people. Without ruling out the possibility, the arguer can not draw a further conclusion.

In the second place, granted that 70 percent of the respondents needed to take more work home, there is  no guarantee that they will purchase home office machine and office supplies of office-supply departments. It is also possible that other department of Valu-Mart will also increase the stock of home office machine and office supplies, hence there is not sure that the potential clients will buy home office machine and office supplies from office-supply departments. Without excluding the possibility, the conclusion that office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores is arbitrary. (这一段好像有点问题，你是想说其他部门也会增加办公用品的储备，我觉得对同一个商店而言，不同的department是针对不同的商品的，从逻辑上来说，倒不如改为“可能其他商店也会加强办公用品的储备因而对MV构成竞争威胁”)
Last but not least, the arguer fails to mention the reason that why not office-supply departments is  profitable. It is quite possible that the worse (poor应该更好一些) service and wore (试着改为insufficient) reputation of office-supply departments lead the customers loosing the confidence on office-supply departments, and thus lead to the  sale`s decline （sale’s decline改为declining sales可能更顺一些） of office-supply departments on home office machine and office supplies. Before finding the real reason of  the  sale`s decline, what the arguer maintain is unwarranted.

In conclusion, the argument lacks credibility because the proof quoted in the construe （construe是动词吧，可试着改为line of reasoning） can lend less support to what the arguer insists. To convince us, the arguer needs to provide more evidence concerning the status of customer and bad profitable reasons of  office-supply departments.
文中的少量拼写错误已帮你改过来了，
感觉结构上可以了，
语言表达上还是有些句子不通顺，（都在文中标出来了）不过问题不大，在多练习一下^_^
加紧复习，大家一起加油！！

nanziUID: 2126362

4#的同学，没必要那么悲观嘛。
你写的不错啊！