总算能上了 不好意思来迟了
这是argument
这几天系统出了点问题总是登不上,不好意思来迟了
ARGUMENT14
In this memo, the arguer concludes that Green Thumb Gardening centre should expand the number of vegetable seeds they stock for gardeners for the purpose of increasing their profits. To support this recommendation, the arguer cites the following facts about the necessity to emphasize on the stock of vegetable seeds:(1) A national survey conducted last month claimed that many consumers were dissatisfied with vegetables provided in supermarkets.(2)The magazine Great Gardens has sold well at the village News stand as long as three months. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.
First of all, the so-called national survey conducted last month do not necessarily indicate that the local consumers are dissatisfied with the vegetables in supermarkets as well, which could be the opposite one. Even if the arguer convinces me that the national survey represents fully of the local situation, it was based on the circumstance happened last month, which do not necessarily predict the future tendency. It's entirely possible that the vegetables available in supermarkets will be better and much more acceptable next month due to the measures the supermarkets may take to improve the present situation .Without eliminating such possibilities, I cannot accept the arguer's point of recommendation of expanding vegetable seeds stock.
Secondly, the arguer falsely equates the situations that the survey revealed with the tendency the consumers to grow vegetables all by themselves. Even if the consumers do dissatisfied with the vegetables in supermarkets and the future tendency seems to stay unchanged, they probably continue to purchase vegetables in supermarkets in spite of the dissatisfactory .Or perhaps they may buy vegetables in other markets and booths, which means that they unnecessarily grow their own vegetables .In short, without ruling out other possible reasons for the so-called national survey conducted last month, the arguer cannot convince me on the basis of them that it's urgent for Green Thumb Gardening Centre to expand various vegetable seeds this spring.
As for the argument cites that the magazine Great Gardening Centre has sold out at Village News stand three months in a row do not necessarily reflect that Green Thumb Gardening Centre will gain profits by expanding their vegetable seeds stock. In fact, merely relying on the only one village news stand cannot convince me that it represents the whole situation in the local residents. Perhaps this kind of magazine in other news stands cannot achieve as well as it in the village news stand, even in poor situation. Moreover, the fact that the stand has sold magazines very well does not mean that it will increase the profits for Green Thumb Gardening Centre by improving the vegetable seeds stock. It's equally possible that the news stand only sells the magazine called Great Gardens ,which means that it's certain to have sold it out three months in a row. Or perhaps this kind of magazine has sponsored some kind of rewards or argon which indeed helped increase the sales .If so, the fact would further undermine the arguer's relevance in prescribing the necessity of expand their stock of vegetable seeds.
To sum up, the arguer's conclusion about expanding the variety of vegetable seeds stock to increase profits is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer must provide more evidence ,such as local survey about the satisfactory of vegetables served in supermarkets and the future projects of supermarkets .To better assess the problem, I would also need to know consumers' tendency and interest in growing vegetables themselves.
TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Micaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Micaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Micaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
WORDS: 422 TIME: 00:39:05 DATE: 2008-5-11 21:39:27
In this argument, the author concludes that smaller, on-profit hospitals are more economical and serves better quality of treatment than larger, for-profit hospitals. To strengthen this argument, the author provides a statistics comparing the average patient's stay in smaller hospitals and larger ones. The author also cites supporting evidence indicating that the cure rate in smaller ones is twice that of larger ones. Moreover, the author claims that smaller hospitals provide more employees but fewer patients complain .At first glance, the author might be somehow reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumption and is therefore unpersuasive.
First of all, the author claims that the average length of a patient's stay in smaller hospital is much shorter than that in larger one, and automatically assumes that smaller hospital provides better quality of treatment. Nevertheless, this might not be the case. The author obviously overlooks other possible explanations for this phenomenon. For instance, patients with easy curable indisposition choose to visit community hospitals which are always smaller and non-profit ones taking the advantages of convenience .As a consequence, the length of patients' stay is abbreviated for they could go back home for rests. What's more, it’s entirely possible that the patients are set back home without curing thoroughly for the purpose to free beds for emergencies, because they're non-profit smaller ones. Withal the author falsely tantamount the length of stay to the quality of treatment. Without ruling out such possibilities, I cannot accept the author's point.
Second, even assuming that the length of stay reflect the quality of treatment ,the author unfairly indicates a casual relation between cure rate and quality of treatment .There could be other factor, such as the patients visiting larger, for-profit hospitals always with sever diseases, which would take a long time for curing. Without accounting for other possibility, the author cannot reasonably conclude that cure rate is responsible for high quality of treatment.
Third, even I concede that the cure rate and length of stay represent the quality of treatment ,the author fails to possible difference between more employees, fewer complaints and better quality of treatment .More employees can be a result of the lower work efficiency, or of poor competence individually, while fewer complaints can merely represent those who respondent. Both cannot hold water. Since the author fails to account for these possibilities, the argument cannot make any sound recommendation.
In sum ,the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it the author must either provide better evidence that the average length of a patient's stay relates closely to the quality of treatment, or the cure rate represents fully about this point. To better assess the problem ,I would also need to know the reasons why smaller hospitals need more employees together with the rate of respondents.
