|
51.The following memorandum is from the business manager of HappyPancake House restaurants.
"Butter has now been replaced by margarine in Happy PancakeHouse restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. Only about 2percent of customers have complained, indicating that 98 people out of 100 arehappy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number ofcustomers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarineinstead. Clearly, either these customers cannot distinguish butter frommargarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine.Thus, to avoid the expense of purchasing butter and to increase profitability,the HappyPancake House should extend this cost-saving change to its restaurants in thesoutheast and northeast as well."
Write aresponse in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in orderto decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Besure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate therecommendation.
正文 35 min
In thisargument, this author, just suferficially considering some unwarrantedassumptions, advocates that to avoid the expense of purchasing butter and toincrease profitability, the Happy Pancake House should extend this cost-savingchange to its restaurants in the southeast and northeast as well. Tosupport this argument, the author points out that Only about 2 percent ofcustomers have complained, indicating that 98 people out of 100 are happy withthe change after replacing butter by margarine. Although this argument might bereasonable at first sight, it is virtually unconvincing to som extent.
Firstly, eventhough the author’s assumption mentioned above seems plausible, the author showno evidence to support this crucial assumption because there is no details showthe real thoughts of 98 people out of 100. For instance, it is entirelt possiblethat most of them are discontented about this change as well and they justchoose change another restaurant using butter instead of complaining to HappyPancake House. Without accounting for and precluding this and other alternativeconditions, the author cannot reach the mentioned conclusion.
Secondly,the author should not pay no attention to the result that 2 percent ofcustomers who have complained in that there people might influence thepotential customers of Happy Pancake House. To illustrate this point clearly,let us take a look at the following representative alternative. Some of thepeople who complained the change publish their feelings to their Facebooks and Twitters. There is no doubt that nobody canignore the power of Internet and it might make the Happy Pancake House to getbad impressions in public. So, it will also influence the revenue of theirrestaurants. Hence, to bolster the recommendation, the author must explain whythe alternative will not happen in reality.
Finally, evenif the forgoing assumptions were well all confirmed valid, there remain doubtsthat render the author’s whole reasoning logically flawed. Obviously, the authorshould not be so cursory to make this conclusion that the Happy Pancake Houseshould extend this cost-saving change to its restaurants in the southeast andnortheast as well in that no evidence mentioned that people’s habits aboutbutter in southeast and northeast are the same as southwest. It is entirelypossible that southeastern and northeastern people hate margarine. So, theauthor’s reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can guarantee that theseand other possible scenarios are unlikely.
To sumup, the argument not only is logically unsound but also relies on doubtfulassumptions . it is presumptuous to assert that the Happy Pancake House shouldextend this cost-saving change to its restaurants in the southeast andnortheast as well merely based on the evidence author mentioned above. To makea more logical argument, the author should provide more credible and convincingevidence.
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2013-4-6 19:20:31
收藏
收藏
楼主
