|
The following appeared as part of an article in the business section of a local newspaper
“The owners of the Cumquat Café evidently made a good business decision in moving to a new location, as can be seen from the fact that the Café will soon celebrate its second anniversary there. Moreover, it appears that businesses are not likely to succeed at the old location: since the Café’s move, three different businesses — a tanning salon, an antique emporium, and a pet –grooming shop — have occupied its former spot.” 这是我用自己总结的模板写的第一篇文章. 思路大概是: 1 二周年不代表生意好,生意不好也能维持两年.即使生意很好,也可能不是location造成的 2 其他三家换地方不一定是生意不好才换的,也可能是太好了才换到其它大地方去.即使是生意不好关门,不一定是location造成的.因为那个地方的人对那个不感兴趣所以关门 3 这三家经营不好不代表Cafe也不行 不知道一篇文章能不能反复这么说"作者说A导致B,可没给出证据证明A不好啊,A可能挺好的其它导致了B.即使A真的不好,也不一定导致B".
恳请大家指点,万分感谢!!!
================================================================================= In this argument, the author concludes that the owner of the Cumquat Cafe made a successful decision in moving to a new location. To bolster the conclusion, the author points out the Cafe will celebrate its second anniversary there. An additional reason given in support of this conclusion is that other three different businesses have continually occupied its former spot. While this argument, admittedly, appears to be acceptable on its face, meticulous scrutiny reveals that the conclusion is based on some dubious assumption and the line of reasoning bears certain inevitable fallacies. The main problem of the argument would be discussed respectively. In the first place, the author unfairly assumes that moving to a new location is a wise decision because the Cafe will celebrate its second anniversary there. Operating for two years is not necessarily a symbol of successful business. It is entirely possible that the profits here are much fewer than that in the original location, but it kept open for two years. Even the revenues here is better than before, it may not because of location. Other factors such as promotion, fewer competitors, changes in the taste and reduced transportation costs may contribute to the growth. Therefore, this argument is groundless unless the author could provide further information about the Cafe's current performance and rule out other possibilities to generate the same effect. In the second place, the author takes for granted that the three different businesses, a tanning salon, an antique emporium and a pet-grooming shop have occupied its former spot because they run badly. What if they were so popular that they had to move to other bigger locations? Thus the argument is unsounded. Even their close was because they did not make money, the problem may not be location. For example, most people in the city are not interested in tanning salons or antiques, and they do not like pets, it is reasonable that these shops have to close down and switch to another city where people are fond of these things. In the third place, rested on the assumption that the Cafe is similar to all the other three businesses in all aspects, the author concludes that these three stores perform bad so Cafe will perform bad. Yet the problem is that the author fails to realize the situations are not similar enough to justify the analogical deduction. The Cafe and other three businesses, actually, bear numerous differences. For example, coffee is the daily drinks whereas the other three are not essential in people's life. What's more, the Cafe may have no competitors in the town so it can take one hundred percent of market shares, while the other three have many competitors. Therefore, the Cafe may not experience the same consequence if it stays in the old location. In conclusion, this argument is somewhat defective and hence is not reasonable and persuasive as it stands. It is imprudent for the author to claim that the owner of the Cumquat Cafe made a good decision. To make this argument logically acceptable, the author would have to show that the second anniversary means good business and location plays a significant role in it. In addition, to solidify the conclusion, the author should provide concrete evidences to demonstrate that other three businesses change location because this location is not good enough for them to make profits, and the Cafe will experience the same consequence if stays in the old location. | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2008-9-20 16:33:00
楼主
