题目如下： A recent sales study indicated that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants that specialize in seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about eating healthily. Therefore, a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable.
In this argument, the arguer recommends that a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood would be quite popular and profitable. To substantiate this recommend, the arguer cites some evidence that seafood is popular among Bag City residents and there is a big market in Bag City. However, careful examination of the supporting evidence reveals that none of them lend convincing support to the arguer’s recommendation. First, a 30 percent rise in seafood’s consumption does not necessarily indicate that a sufficient demand of seafood in this city. Perhaps the real level of consumption might be very low and just a few residents in this city like eating seafood. This scenario is quite possible, especially considering that there are no currently seafood’s restaurants in Bay City. Lacking evidence that the real demand of seafood is very high in Bay City, the arguer cannot convince me that the restaurant specializing in seafood would be quite popular. Secondly, even if there is a sufficient demand of seafood in Bay City, the arguer cites no evidence to prove that two-income families in Bay City eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago, though there is a nationwide study to prove that. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that two-income families in Bay City eat more home-cooked meals than they did 10 years ago just because eat home-cooked meals come into fashion among two-income families in Bay City. Even assuming that they eat more in the restaurant than they did a decade ago, it is unreasonable to infer that these families will patronize a new seafood restaurant in Bay City. Perhaps they have their own favorite restaurant and do not want to go to a new restaurant. Or perhaps the existence restaurants provide myriad of delicious seafood and there is no need for the citizens to patronize a new seafood restaurant. Any of these scenarios, if true, would draw considerable doubt on the argument’s conclusion that a new seafood restaurant in Bay City would be quite popular and profitable. Finally, the arguer fails to consider the relationship between revenue and expense and provide no evidence to prove that the new seafood restaurants would be profitable. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that the restaurant’s cost of obtaining high-quality, healthful seafood might render it unprofitable though it might be very popularity. Without weighing revenue against expenses the arguer’s conclusion is premature at best. In sum, the arguer fails to convince me that a new seafood restaurant in Bay City would be quite popular and profitable. To strengthen the argument the author should provide direct evidence that the demand of the seafood in Bay City is really high. To better assess the argument I would need detailed cost and revenue estimates for a new Bay City seafood restaurant.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-11-24 18:15:45
收藏
收藏
楼主
