- UID
- 727926
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-2-26
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client.
"Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced 90 days with below- average temperatures, and climate forecasters at Waymash University predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past years. Because these developments will certainly result in an increased demand for heating oil, we recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations in the retail sale of home heating oil."
In this article, the author predicts that last year the northeastern United States had experienced 90 days with below-average temperatures, and this trend will go on for several years. Meanwhile, many new home have been built in this area, thus, the demanding of oil which is traditionally used in this area as main fuel will skyrocket. In the end, he concludes that the client should invest in Consolidated Industries. Granted that it seems to be somewhat appealing, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.
Firstly, the article unfairly presumes that 90 days with below- average temperature is anomy, in fact, maybe most winters in this region have below-average winters more than three months. Last year was not especially cold compared with other years. This scenario is quite possible, especially considering that northeast has extreme cold weather in winter. So the climate forecasters may just point out a regular situation.
Secondly, the arguer relies on unwarranted assumes that the new built house will increase the need for oil. While this may be true on some occasions, the statement can readily be explained by factors such as the demand for housing in the area happens to rocket dramatically due to tour result. In the night and on the holidays, the visitors all back their own home. Perhaps these people just come here in fine weathers such as spring and autumn. In these conditions, the using of fuel will not increase. Lacking more specific information about how the new homes function, it is impossible to evaluate the reliability of the results or to make an informed recommendation.
Thirdly, even the demanding for heat will increase greatly, it's a huge leap to conclude that Consolidated Industries will be a good investment. It's possible that most home heating oil is not provided by retailer. So the demanding increase may just has a very small infect on this company. Or perhaps, the company may employ imprudent strategies or poor management, which may cause a diminishment in the sales.
In addition to these serious problems, even if that all the foregoing assumptions are justified, the advisor simply assumes that oil fuel will be the main heating material in the future. There is every reason to doubt that what the arguer claims will not happen in reality. It is just as possible that there are cheaper but highly-qualified products from the formidable opponents coming in the instant future. In so much as these products will tout more customers and make the future’s sales sharply down. Unless the arguer can demonstrate that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely, the deduction is open to doubt.
In sum, the speaker cannot justify his or her recommendation on the basis of the scant evidence provided in the letter. To bolster the recommendation the author must provide better evidence that (1) this region will undergo extremely cold winters, (2) CI has a market advantage in the whole fuel market and will keep the advantage(3) oil will fulfill the most heating demand in the foresee future.
提纲：
1.以前用油做燃料，以后未必还是这样，因为可能科技的发展，有新的更节能也能便宜的替代能源，尤其是在更冷需求更强烈的情况下，研发和推广可能更快，这样oil可能很快被取代。
2.过去经历了90天的超低温，是否不正常呢？也许每年都是经历90天以上的超低温，这不算是什么改变。天气预报员指出未来几年保持很冷的趋势，是否可以作为依据？但是论者要假定：这些天气预报员是真正的专家，他们的预测比较可靠。
3.有计划建许多房子，不一定很快会建好，说不定五年十年还没有建好，这对于投资来说不是好消息。就算建好了新房子也不一定会使用这种方式供暖，或者就算是仍然使用燃油供暖，由于供暖的效率大大提高整体的使用量可能减少。
4.即使需求增长了，也不一定都通过零售的方式来践行。即使是以零售的方式增长，也不一定都是这家增加。虽然它是主要的一家，可能只排第四第五名，而头三名可能占据了主要的份额。
5.就算是这家营业额有增长，也不一定意味着利润增长。只有当该公司能够确定会因该地区居民的燃油采暖而受益，带来了销量和利润的增加，才能作为对其投资的有力依据。
第二篇argument发现的问题：第一、词穷，好日常的表达譬如天气、市场等等不会；这两天要有意识的汇总一下。第二、不清楚在每一点的论证里哪些算是“冗余”信息，哪些应该或者必须从原文中摘出来以使表达完整；一会儿有针对性的看北美范文。第三，攻击的时候基本上是按照文章罗列的顺序，开始写得太废太长了，加上很多表达不清楚进入状态比较慢，前两条写完都四十分钟了。考场上这样就完蛋了。接下来要注意大的攻击点和小的攻击点的详略安排。再写三四篇要开始总结模板和计时了。 |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-7-30 20:07:10
收藏
收藏
