|
各位大师好：
下面是4月一道JJ题目，偶的文章如下，请高手帮忙修改，点评并给出分数，谢谢。第一次写。
【原题】黄金80题72 The following appeared as part of a recommendation from the business manager of a department store. “Local clothing stores reported that their profits decreased, on average, for the three-month period between August 1 and October 31. Stores that sell products for the home reported that, on average, their profits increased during this same period. Clearly, consumers are choosing to buy products for their homes instead of clothing. To take advantage of this trend, we should reduce the size of our clothing departments and enlarge our home furnishings and household products departments.”
The conclusion endorsed in the argument is that the department store should reduce the size of their clothing department and enlarge their home furnishings and household products departments in order to increase their total profits. Several reasons are offered in support of this argument. First of all, the business manager points out that the profits of local clothing stores decrease between August 1 and October 31 whereas profits of the home products stores increase. In addtion, the business manager reasons that customers are choosing to buy product for their homes instead of clothing. At first glance, the author’s argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that the conclusion is based on some dubious assumptions and the reasoning is biased due to the inadequacy and partiality in the nature of evidence provided to justify the conclusion. A careful examination will review how groundless this conclusion is. Firstly, the evidence the business manager provides is insufficient to support the conclusion drawn from it. The statistics from only 3 months periods is not necessarily a good indicator of future trends. It is possible that what happens to the department stores is just temporary and occasional during 3 months. In fact, in face of such limited evidence, the conclusion that reducing the clothing deparment and enlarging the home products department is completely unwarranted. Secondly, the business manager commits the fallacy of “ all things are equal”. The fact happened during these 3 months is not a sound evidence to conclude that the profits of clothing stores are decreasing and that the profits of home products are increasing in the following days too. The business manager assumes without justification that the background conditions have remained the same at different times. However, it is not clear in this argument whether the following conditions are the same as the current conditions. Thus , it is impossible to conclude that enlarging the home product stores and reducing clothing stores will increase total profits of this department stores. Thirdly, the author falsely depends on the gratuitous assumption that customers are choosing to buy the home products instead of clothings. However, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. In fact, It is not necessarily the case. For example , it is more likely that due to the weather changes between the two seasons, customer donot purchase the clothing of current season. Therefore , this argument is unwarranted without ruling out such possibility. To conclude, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Accordingly, it is imprudent for the business manager to claim that the department store should reduce the clothing stores and enlarge the home products. To make the argument logically acceptable, the author would have to show that profits of the clothing will decrease and the profits of the home product will increase as well in the future with enough evidence. In addition, to solidify the conclusion, the author should provide concrete evidence as well to demonstrate that cusomters are choosing to purchase the home product instead of clothings. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more thatn just an emotional appeal. | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2013-4-8 18:04:36
收藏
收藏
