俺写的第一篇argument。写得那个吃力，没有计时，写了一个小时估计还有多……
奇怪的是，我感觉最难写的是开头段。因为要用自己的话来总结作者的观点和逻辑链，Ｂ４一下自己的总结和paraphrase能力……
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen
foods:
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become
more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day
service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And
since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to
minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
In this argument the author reaches the conclusion that Olympic Foods can expect that their 25 years' experience will help to maximize profits through minimizing costs. To support this conclusion, the author points out a general principle that the costs of processing normally decrease when organizations learn how to do things better and become more efficient over time. In addition, the author presents an example from the color film processing industry, which indicates a significant decrease in the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print over a 14-year period. Although this argument has some merits, it suffers from at least two critical problems.
To begin with, the author's first and foremost assumption is that the general relation between long time's experience and decrease in costs should be applied to Olympic Foods. However, this is not necessary the case. For example, it is quite possible that Olympic Foods has learnt nothing from its 25 years' experience in the food processing business. It is also likely that, even if they had learnt something to improve their efficiency, due to some radical organizational changes which took place later, those precious knowledge has not been preserved within the company. If this assumption is not valid, the expectation of increased efficiency is completely groundless.
In addition, the author refers to what happened in the color film processing industry as a supporting example, with the assumption that the food processing industry should follow suit. But the differences between the two industries clearly outweigh the similarity, thus making the analogy highly suspected. For instance, customers' idea of healthy food has always been evolving. Food additives and preservatives which were perfectly fine 25 years ago are considered unacceptable nowadays, and the food processing business has to spend a large amount of money on research and equipment upgrading to respond to it, resulting in significant increase in the costs. None of these problems happen in the film processing industry. Therefore, the conclusion drawn from the example of the film processing business is not compelling.
In summary, the author's argument is not persuasive. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should prove that Olympic Foods has learnt how to do things more efficient, and provide more supporting examples from businesses more similar to the food processing industry.
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |