[作文互改] issue 8 argument 9求狠拍！

8. Claim: In any field—business, politics, education,government—those in power should step down after five years.

Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise isrevitalization through new leadership.

Write a response in which you discuss the extentto which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which thatclaim is based.

It’s true that revitalization would infuse energy into an organization.To illustrate, consider why China, the most advanced and flourishingcivilization 500 years ago, eventually became the semi-colony in the end of the19th century. I would say it’s largely because of the hereditarysystem that pass on power to the emperor’s direct descendents. The same loyal familyreign over the empire for so many years that they gradually lost the originalfortitude, became corrupt, and almost inevitably declined in the end.

However, it’s not safe to say revitalization through new leadership is“surely path to success for any enterprise”. On one hand, there are so manyfactors that would contribute to an enterprise’s success except for newleadership. For example, the capabilities of all the members, the ability ofthe leader and also the overall macro-environment. On the other hand,revitalization through new leadership do not necessarily lead to success. Ifhandled in a wrong way and if the new leader turns out to be totally crappy,the new leadership would in no way be conducive. What’s more, even if the newleader is capable and judicious, we cannot guarantee that the enterprise wouldbe successful, given the many other factors stated above.

Even though the reason that “thesurest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through newleadership” holds, we could not derive the claim that those in powever shouldstep down after 5 years in any field.

  Tosum up, whether or not to change the leadership regularly depends on the actualsituation of business organization, education or government. While newleadership could be beneficial for the enterprise’s well being, one should alsoinvestigate all the possible incidental harms before making a decision.

9. Nature's Way, a chain of stores selling health foodand other health-related products, is opening its next franchise in the town ofPlainsville. The store should prove to be very successful: Nature's Wayfranchises tend to be most profitable in areas where residents lead healthylives, and clearly Plainsville is such an area. Plainsville merchants reportthat sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs. Thelocal health club has more members than ever, and the weight training andaerobics classes are always full. Finally, Plainsville's schoolchildrenrepresent a new generation of potential customers: these schoolchildren arerequired to participate in a fitness-for-life program, which emphasizes thebenefits of regular exercise at an early age.

Write a response in which you examine thestated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how theargument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for theargument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

To begin with, a lot more questions should be askedregarding this research. Where did the author get the result that Nature's Wayfranchises tend to be most profitable in areas where residents lead healthylives? Is this research really credible, representative and objective? And howmuch is the gap? Is it huge or just a small discrepancy? Also, is it possiblethat the profitability is generally bad but become slightly better in areaswhere people lead a healthy life? If this is the case, this fact then cannot beused to back the idea that the new store in Plainsville, if the people therelead a healthy life, would be successful.

Besides, the authur boldly assumes there’s a causalrelation between profitability and residents’ lifestyle. You can’t get thatresult simply as a result of  a paraleltrend. To explain, it’s sunny today and it’s hot. Clearly you cannot say it’shot because it’s sunny or the contrary. There are plenty of factors that maycontribute to this paralel trend. For one thing, it may be just a coincidencethat Nature’s Way get higher profits in areas where people lead a healthy life.For another, maybe in some areas, the government promote healthy lifestyle.Thus people would very likely have a healthy life and the support of governmentwill also make the health-oriented store more profitable.

Apart from the above, the author lists a range of factsthat he implies to be signs indicating people actually live a healthy life inPlainsville. Yet all of these aguments are untenable and needs furtherexplanations.

The authur firstly states that Plainsville merchantsreport that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs.But how high is it? Chances are that the sales of those goods are consistentlylow and just become a little bit higher at the time of the report. If this istrue, this evidence would evidently not useful in the arthur’s argument. Thenthe author shows us another fact that the local club has more members than everand weight training and aerobics classed are always full. But what kind ofclubs and classes are they? Are they just small luxury clubs and classes forthe rich? In that case, the fact is not representative enough to derive furtherconclusion from it. Finally the author shows that schoolchidren are required toparticioate in a fitness-for-life program that emphasizes the benefits ofregular exercise at an early age. Yet in developing his argument, the authorimplies that this town is virtually closed to outcomers, which means there areno immigrations and emmigrations, which is clearly not true. A lot more peoplemay move in and out. Therefore, this “potential customers” is also unreliable.

Apart from the above, we should also consider thepossibility that a a huge sport event is on show at this time. For example, theOplympics, the Big Bowl or whatever. The flourishing appearance may be simply aresult of this provisional event. Thus it cannot guarantee a perpetual demand.

To sum up, given all the weak assumptions, the author’sargument is insufficent to back his own idea. Further investigation is neededto draw any concrete conclusion.