Question:>>
The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president.>>
`The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available.~>>
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.>>
********************>>
Your Answer:
The executive of Easy Credit Company proposed that in order to attract new customers, increase the use among existing customers, and higher the interest rates of their credit cards, the company should donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of their cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on their card. The executive based the plan on a recent poll which shows that a pretty large amount of people is concerned about environmental issues and the plan mentioned above would raise the positive image of their credit card in the public and further more generate new customers and larger profit.
But, over viewing on the whole proposal, we will find that there are several
我没有见过but这么用,是不是应该用however?
logical flaws in the plan, and I will list some of them as follow:
固定用法好象应该是as follows
In the first place, there is no evidence that will demonstrate the anticipants of the
为什么用将来时呢?
survey are the typical customers of the credit cards. It is possible that they are people who care about the environmental issues but never have ability to own a credit card, and then the proposal of the credit card company will definitely fail.
呵呵在米国有人会never have ability to own a credit card吗?我不是很清楚,但是感觉应该不会。
In the second place, people who concerned about environmental issues maybe do not consider the logo of environmental organization on the credit cards as a symbol showing the credit card company is helpful to the environmental issues. So they still have no preference to the credit cards of Easy Credit Company.
In addition to the matters mentioned above, what is also important to evaluate the proposal is whether the competitors of Easy Credit Company are doing the same action to attract customers. If most of the credit card companies print a logo of environmental organization on their cards, then the action of Easy Credit Company will generate no benefits or advantages in the competition.
As a result, though the proposal the executive raised seems a little meaningful, we have more reasons to suspect its effect in the reality. Weighing among the advantages and disadvantages on the issue, I think it is more reasonable to oppose the suggestion because the flaws mentioned above.
写完第一篇之后本来以为已经写了很多了,帖到word里面一数才360个词,谁谁谁跟我说过至少要400字以上的,我寒,第2篇狂写啊...
还有,第1篇里面我把所有的environmental都拼写成enviornmental...到word中检查时狂郁闷的...
水平很高哦!写到这个水平个人觉得360个字也没有什么大不了的。注意一下小地方,如果可以的话多看看提纲多找一下逻辑错误,ARGUMENT拿高分绝对没有问题的。我的提纲如下仅供参考:
1环保组织所提供的标识所关心的方面和民众所关心的方面可能不一致 2关心环保问题不意味着他们就一定会采取一些具体的措施象是在这个例子里面购买这个公司的产品 The author assumes that the public's concern about environmental issues will result in its taking steps to do something about the problem-in this case, to use the Easy Credit Company credit card. 3权衡了额外付出的成本和收益之后并不一定值得这么做.
还有麻烦你改一下标题,可以参考置顶的发贴须知。
[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-14 20:51:40编辑过] |