标题: 527第一篇Argu 35--Sunnyside Towers, 求拍@CDer [打印本页] 作者: brucelxl 时间: 2012-4-30 00:23 标题: 527第一篇Argu 35--Sunnyside Towers, 求拍@CDer In this argument, the author draws a conclusion that modifying showerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings will increase profits even more dramastically. While it may seem convincing, the arguer does not make a cogent case to bolster it. This argument is in fact irrational.
Firstly, the arguer indicates that the change will obviously result in considerable saving for the corporation. There is actually no evidence to confirm the assumption. To set an example, the lower water pressure may lead to a longer shower time and thus probably a larger amount of water usage. It makes a huge difference to the revenue whether the consumers are charged by the amount of water usage or the shower time. Even if the water usage decreases, can it cover the potential lost committed by the consumers’ departure because of the change? Unless the data is fully representative and valid, it can be used to back this argument.
Secondly, the arguer implies that there are a few complaints about the lower water pressure. It is not clear, however. It is likely that people are dissatisfied with the change, instead of complaining, they just sway to other buildings or even other retailers. To justify the author’s argument, a detailed survey asking the authentic attitude of the customers may be benifitial.
Last but not least, basing upon the implications that the present change results in a considerable saving and that that just gives rise to a few complaints, the author predicts that modifying the showerheads throughout all twelve buildings will increase the profits. There is no guarantee that the present accomplishment is suitable to all the other buildings. It’s possible that some buildings are taller than the first three ones. The adjustment of the water pressure will have a more severe impact on customers. Without accounting for all this and other possibilities, the conclusion can not be exactly established.
In a word, the author’s argument mentioned above is not reasonable or persuasive. More detailed information is badly needed to substantiate the argument.
