《The Pool of Argument 范文125篇.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《The Pool of Argument 范文125篇.doc（78页珍藏版）》请在三一文库上搜索。
1、The Pool of Argument TopicsArgument 1The following appeared in a memorandum written by the vice president of Natures Way, a chain of stores selling health food and other health-related products. Previous experience has shown that our stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly con
2、cerned with leading healthy lives. We should therefore build our next new store in Plainsville, which has many such residents. Plainsville merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs. The local health club, which nearly closed five years ago due to lack o
3、f business, has more members than ever, and the weight training and aerobics classes are always full. We can even anticipate a new generation of customers: Plainsvilles schoolchildren are required to participate in a fitness for life program, which emphasizes the benefits of regular exercise at an e
4、arly age.In this memo the vice president of Natures Way CNW), a chain of stores selling health food and health-related products, recommends opening a store in Plainesville. To support this recommendation the vice president cites the following facts about Plainesville: (1) sales of exercise shoes and
5、 clothing are at all-time highs; (2) the local health club is more popular than ever; and (3) the citys schoolchildren are required to participate in a fitness program. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation. First, stron
6、g sales of exercise apparel do not necessarily indicate that Plainesville residents would be interested in NWs products, or that these residents are interested in exercising. Perhaps exercise apparel happens to be fashionable at the moment, or inexpensive compared to other types of clothing. For tha
7、t matter, perhaps the stronger-than-usual sales are due to increasing sales to tourists. In short, without making out other possible reasons for the strong sales the vice president cannot convince me on the basis of them that Plainesville residents are exercising regularly, let alone that they would
8、 be interested in buying the sorts of food and other products that NW sells. Secondly, even if exercise is more popular among Plainesville residents than ever before, the vice president assumes further that people who exercise regularly are also interested in buying health food and health-related pr
9、oducts. Yet the memo contains no evidence to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that aside from exercising Plainesville residents have little interest in leading a healthy lifestyle. In fact, perhaps as a result of regular exercise they believe they are sufficientl
10、y fit and healthy and do not need a healthy diet. Thirdly, the popularity of the local health club is little indication that NW will earn a profit from a store in Plainesville. Perhaps club members live in an area of Plamesville nowhere near feasible sites for a NW store. Or perhaps the clubs primar
11、y appeal is as a singles meeting place, and that members actually have little interest in a healthy lifestyle. Besides, even if the clubs members would patronize a NW store these members might be insufficient in number to ensure a profit for the store, especially considering that this health club is
12、 the only one inPlainesville. Fourth, the fact that a certain fitness program is mandatory for Plainesvilles school children accomplishes nothing toward bolstering the recommendation. Many years must pass before these children will be old enough to make buying decisions when it comes to food and hea
13、lth-related products. Their habits and interests might change radically over time. Besides, mandatory participation is no indication of genuine interest in health or fitness. Moreover, when these children grow older it is entirely possible that they will favor an unhealthy lifestyle-as a reaction to
14、 the healthful habits imposed upon them now. Finally, even assuming that Plamesville residents are strongly interested in eating health foods and health-related products, the recommendation rests on two additional assumptions:(1) that this interest will continue in the foreseeable future, and (2) th
15、at Plainesville residents will prefer NW over other merchants that sell similar products. Until the vice president substantiates both assumptions I remain unconvinced that a NW store in Plainesville would be profitable. In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it
16、 unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation the vice president must provide dear evidence-perhaps by way of a local survey or study-that Plainesville residents who buy and wear exercise apparel, and especially the health clubs members, do in fact exercise regularly, and that these exer
17、cisers are likely to buy health foods and health related products at a NW store. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know why Plainesvilles health club is nonular, and why Plainesville does not contain more health clubs. I would also need to know what competition NW might face in Pl
18、ainesville.Argument 2The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deer haven Acres to all homeowners in Deer haven Acres. Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the communitys yards should be landscaped and wha
19、t colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting.In this letter a committee of Deerhaven Acres homeown
20、ers recommends that in order to enhance Deerhaven property values homeowners should follow certain restrictions concerning their homes exterior appearance. To support this recommendation the committee points out that in the seven years since Brookville adopted similar restrictions property values th
21、ere have risen. This argument rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.A threshold assumption upon which the recommendation relies is that Brookville home owners implemented Brookvilles restrictions in the first place. The letter fails to substanti
22、ate this crucial assumption. If these restrictions were not implemented, then any change in Brookvilles property values cannot be attributed to them. Accordingly, the committee cannot draw any firm conclusion about what effect similar restrictions would have on Deer haven property values.Even assumi
23、ng that Brookville homeowners implemented these restrictions, the committee relies on the additional assumption that this course of action was responsible for the increase in Brookville property values. However, it is entirely possible that one or more other factors were instead responsible for the
24、increase, especially since a considerable period of time has passed since Brookville adopted its restrictions. Property values are a function of supply and demand. Perhaps the demand for housing in the area has increased due to an influx of major employers. Or, perhaps the supply of housing has decr
25、eased. Either scenario would provide an alternative explanation for the increase in property values. Even assuming that Brookvilles rising property values are attributable to the implementation of these restrictions, the committee fails to consider possible differences between Brookville and Deer ha
26、ven that might help to bring about a different result for Deer haven. For instance, potential Deer haven home-buyers might be less interested in a homes exterior appearance than Brookville home-owners. For that matter, perhaps Deer haven home-buyers would find consistent exterior appearance a distas
27、teful feature in which case adopting these restrictions might actually tend to decrease Deer-haven property values.Without accounting for these and other possible dissimilarities, the committee cannot assume that what resulted in rising property values in Brookville would bring about the same result
28、 in Deerhaven.In conclusion, to persuade me that Deerhaven should adopt the proposed restrictions the committee must supply clear evidence that the implementation of Brookvilles restrictions, and not some other factor, was responsible for the rise in Brookvilles property values. The committee must a
29、lso provide evidence that other factors affecting home prices in the two areas are otherwise essentially the same.Argument 3The following appeared in a newspaper article about law firms in the city of Megalopolis.In Megalopolis, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporat
30、e firms declined by 15% over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usually offer much higher salaries, law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely because they experience gre
31、ater job satisfaction at smaller firms. In a survey of first-year students at a leading law school, most agreed with the statement that earning a high salary was less important to them than job satisfaction. This finding suggests that the large, corporate firms of Megalopolis will need to offer grad
32、uates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work.This article concludes that despite the relatively high salaries at Megalopolis large law firms, these firms must begin offering more benefits and incentives to new law-school graduates, while requiring them to work few
33、er hours, in order to reverse a 3-year 15% decline in the number of graduates going to work for these firms. To justify this conclusion the articles author notes that during the last 3 years the number of new law-school graduates going to work for small firms has risen. The author also cites a surve
34、y at one leading law school in which most first-year students indicated that job satisfaction was more important than salary. I find this argument logically unconvincing in several respects.First of all, the 15% decline that the author cites is not necessarily due to the vocational preferences of ne
35、w law-school graduates. It is entirely possible that the number of new graduates preferring to work for large firms has not declined, but that during the last three years MegalopoLis large firms have had fewer and fewer job openings for these graduates. Since the article fails to account for this al
36、ternative explanation for the 15% decline, the articles author cannot make any sound recommendations to law firms based on that decline.As for the survey that the article cites, the vocational goals of first-year law students do not necessarily reflect those of graduating students; after all, a law
37、students vocational goals can change over a three-year period. Moreover, the goals of students at one law school do not necessarily reflect those of the overall pool of graduates that might seek employment with Megalopolis law firms. In fact, given that the school whose students participated in the
38、survey was a leading school, it is entirely possible that the vast majority of the schools graduates may choose among offers from many large firms in many cities. If so, this fact would further undermine the surveys relevance in prescribing any course of action for Megalopolis law firms.Finally, the
39、 author falsely equates the proposed tangible incentives with job satisfaction, which is an intangible reward based on the nature of ones work. Moreover, enhanced job benefits can be tantamount to an enhanced salary, and shorter working hours tantamount to a higher hourly wage. Thus if new law-schoo
40、l graduates seeking jobs in Megalopolis are less interested in monetary rewards than in job satisfaction, then the proposed incentives are not likely to entice these graduates.In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it the author must either mo
41、dify the proposal to provide incentives for those seeking job satisfaction over monetary rewards, or provide better evidence that new law school graduates seeking jobs in Megalopolis would hope the proposed incentives enticing.Argument 4Of the two leading real estate firms in our town-Adams Realty a
42、nd Fitch Realty-Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitchs $144,000. Homes listed wit
43、h Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams. The autho
44、r of this argument claims that Adams Realty is superior to Fitch Realty. To support this claim the author cites certain statistics about the number and working hours of the firms agents, and the number and sales prices of homes sold by the two firms. The author also cites anecdotal evidence involvin
45、g her own experience with Fitch and Adams. Close scrutiny of this evidence reveals that it lends little credible support for the authors assertion.The author bases her claim partly on the fact that Adams has more agents than Fitch, and that many of Fitchs agents work only part-time. However, the aut
46、hor provides no evidence that the quality of a real-estate firm is directly proportional to the number of its agents or the number of hours per week that its agents work. Lacking such evidence, it is equally possible that a smaller firm is more effective than a larger one, and that a part-time agent
47、 is more effective than a full-time agent. Besides, the author does not provide any information about how many Adams agents work part-time.To further support her claim the author cites the fact that Adams sold more properties last year than Fitch. However, the author overlooks the possibility that l
48、ast years sales volume amounted to an aberration, and that in most other years Adams has actually sold fewer properties than Fitch. Moreover, the disparity in sales volume can readily be explained by factors other than the comparative quality of the two firms. Perhaps Adams serves a denser geographi
49、c area, or an area where turnover in home-ownership is higher for reasons unrelated to Adams effectiveness. Or perhaps sales volume is higher at Adams simply because it employs more agents, and each Adams agent actually sells fewer homes on average than each Fitch agent does. Without ruling out such alternative explanations for the disparity in sales volume, the author cannot defend the conclusion that based on this evidence that Adams is superior to Fitch.In