- UID
- 700528
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-12-10
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
60. The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice for a client.
"Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last heating season that region experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures, and climate forecasters predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes are being built in the region in response to recent population growth. Because of these trends, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In this argument, the author predicts that an increased demand for heating oil and recommends investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil.To support the prediction and recommendation the author first points out that last heating season, the northeastern United States ,where traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating, experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures, and climate forecasters predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Then he/she also claims that many new homes are being built in the region in response to recent population growth. However, I find this prediction and recommendation suspicious on several grounds.
One, the author unfairly assumes that oil usage of last heating season was more than that of other years.It is very likely that the amount of heating oil of each year were similar and there is no relationships between temperature and oil consumption .Therefore, without detailed and accurate information about the comparison about the amount of oil between last heating season and seasons of other years, the prediction that there would be an increased demand for heating oil is unpersuasive.
Two, even if there was an increase of the amount of oil last heating season, the author provides no clear evidence to justify the assumption that climate forecasters have an accurate prediction. .It is entirely possible that the climate forecasters often give an inaccurate prediction and the forecast accuracy is pretty low, thus, the prediction that this weather pattern will continue for several more years is unbelievable.Therefore, without ruling out this possibility, the advisor cannot convince me that the prediction of oil demand is true and the recommendation is advisable.
And finally, even if the weather forcast is convincing, the assumption that many new houses indict that a higher amount of oil is also irrational. Perhaps people would prefer new environmentally friendly fuel , hence, the amount of heating oil would not have a increase. Therefore, without showing clearly that oil would be used as the major fuel for heating in new homes, it is impossible to determine that the prediction of an increased demand for heating oil, thus the recommendation is ill-conceived.
Summed up, the recommendation is not on sound reasoning and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it the advisor must provide clear and persuasive evidence that the amount of oil has a positive correlation with the temperature.That the weather forecast is convincing. In addition must prove that the new homes would choose oil as the heating fuel.
我知道最后一个很重要的关于投资供应商的攻击点没有写，时间不够了，所以在想要不要开头段就不写那么多了，上来就说作者的结论是...,然后发现几点可疑，开头用一句话概括，可以吗？这样节省时间~~
还有，能给打一下分吗？谢谢啦 |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-3-12 23:02:23
收藏
收藏
楼主
