今天再来贴一篇aa第44篇
希望有人在批评一下
让我才有进步的空间
谢谢
In this argument, the author concludes that to add new department or service that offer such a range of service will give us a competitive advantage over other local stores to support this conclusion, and he/she points out that the Megamart grocery store total sales have increased this years by 20 percent since they added a pharmacy section to our grocery store. Clearly, the customer’s main concern is the convenience afford by one-step shopping. In addition the arguer reasons that add new department or service can make more competitive advantage over other local stores. At first glance, the arguer appears to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that more evidence should be address to substantiate the argument. Therefore, working on my basic understanding of the situation, I disagree with the argument for the following reasons.
In the first place, the argument rests on a gratuitous assumption that adding more department or service that offers such a range of service will give us a competitive advantage over other stores. The author unfairly assumes that the sales increase this year by 20 percent since they added a pharmacy section to megament grocery store. However, the assumption is questionable because the author provides no evidence to support this argument.
In the second place, the argument commits a local fallacy of add the pharmacy section and increased the 20 percent total sales. In case the mere fact that the pharmacy store of megament grocery store is only one pharmacy store in the city, so this fact alone is insufficient to support the claim that adding addition department stores will increase sales even further.
Finally, even when the arguer justifies all the foregoing assumption, the conclusion remains to be doubtful for it fails to establish a causal connection between these two events and without evidence to support the causal connection between these two events. Therefore, the consideration is still unwarranted.
The conclusion endorsed in this argument is adding addition department stores will increase sales. Several reasons are provide to substantiate the argument. First of all, the author points out that adding pharmacy section is increase 20 percent total sales, so adding addition department will also can make more profit. At first glance, the author’s argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but close scrutiny reveals that conclusion is based on some dubious assumption and the reasoning is biased due to the inadequacy an d partiality in the nature of the evidence offered to justify the conclusion. In the discussion below, I would like to elaborate the logic flaw of the argument.
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |