argument 60

dedede1 · 发表于 2013-3-4 21:09:48

It might seem plausible, at first glance, to agree with the argument from a firm providing investment advice for a client that they 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. However, to fully evaluate this argument, we need to know more information about its stated and unstated assumptions. This argument could end up being much weaker than it seems or it might be quite valid. In order to make that determination, we need to know more and then to analyze this argument.
The first assumption of this argument is that climate forecasters are trust worthy enough to predict weather pattern for next few years. I think this assumption is clearly contrary to our common sense that even weather report for next day sometimes is not accurate. So we need more information about this prediction so that we can know whether we can trust this assumption. If this prediction is based on strictly scientific calculation and analysis, then this argument would be strengthened. Otherwise, this argument would be certainly weakened.
The second assumption of this argument is that no new technology will be applied in heating for next several years and new houses will be designed to use oil for heating. It is important for us to know that whether oil will still be a major heating source for this area in future, we need to know whether there is or will be any better and oil-free heating technology. If there will be some new oil-free ways to heat the house, then oil will no longer be their major fuel for heating and new houses will probably be designed in using better heating technology. In such situation, this argument will certainly be weakened. However, if there is no new technology that can replace oil as major fuel for heating, neither do now or in future, then new houses will still be designed in using oil and this argument will surely be strengthened.
Another assumption of this argument is that Consolidated Industries’ other business is not bad or even good so that it’s profitable in total. Since this argument is from an investment advice, investors surely want to invest their money to some profitable company so that they can benefit from their investment. We need to know more information about Consolidated Industries’ other business because even though retailing sale of home heating oil can get a lot of money, but there are only about 90 days in a year that residents need oil for heating. There are about 270 days that Consolidated Industries need to rely on other business to earn money. If other business of Consolidated Industries in not operating very well, then investor could get nothing back by putting their money to this company and in this case, it would certainly weaker the argument. However, if other business is not bad so that this company can bring benefits to their investors, then this argument is actually quite valid.
To sum up, in order to fully evaluate this argument, we need to know more information about it’s stated and unstated assumptions which are climate forecasters are trust worthy enough to predict weather pattern for next few years, no new technology will be applied in heating for next several years and new houses will be designed to use oil for heating and Consolidated Industries’ other business is not bad or even good so that it’s profitable in total.
words 586
感觉这个argument写作的要求不太一样，“ write a response in which you examine the stated and unstated assumptions....
但我还是沿用了以前的模板，在原来的结构上做了一点点修改，不知道行不行。。。？

竹林中人 · 发表于 2013-3-4 22:30:21

It might seem plausible, at first glance, to agree with the argument from a firm providing investment advice for a client that they(指代谁) 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. However, to fully evaluate this argument, we need to know more information about its stated and unstated assumptions. This argument might end up being much weaker than it seems or it might be quite valid. In order to make that determination, we need to know more and then to analyze this argument.这句话虽然可以成为模板，但最好在不同的题目里面有体现题目的具体信息，否则看上去显得对题目理解不深。

The first assumption of this argument is that climate forecasters are trustworthy enough to predict weather pattern for next few years. I think this assumption is clearly contrary to our common sense that even weather report for next day sometimes is not accurate. So we need more information about this prediction so that we can know whether we can trust this assumption. If this prediction is based on strictly scientific calculation and analysis, then this argument would be strengthened. Otherwise, this argument would be certainly weakened.对assumption的质疑貌似不是这么回事儿，因为在argument中是不需要自己额外的知识和经验积累的，只需要对题目的逻辑推理进行质疑，指出存在什么问题，比如你对天气的质疑，重点不是你所知道的很难预测准确，而是你认为题目给出的天气结论可信，它的依据和推理理。

The second assumption of this argument is that no new technology will be applied in heating for next several years and new houses will be designed to use oil for heating. It is important for us to know that whether oil will still be a major heating source for this area in future, we need to know whether there is or will be any better and oil-free heating technology. If there will be some new oil-free ways to heat the house, then oil will no longer be their major fuel for heating and new houses will probably be designed in using better heating technology. In such situation, this argument will certainly be weakened. However, if there is no new technology that can replace oil as major fuel for heating, neither do now or in future, then new houses will still be designed in using oil and this argument will surely be strengthened.

Another assumption of this argument is that Consolidated Industries’ other business is not bad or even good so that it’s profitable in total. Since this argument is from an investment advice, investors surely want to invest their money to some profitable company so that they can benefit from their investment. We need to know more information about Consolidated Industries’ other business because even though retailing sale of home heating oil can get a lot of money, but there are only about 90 days in a year that residents need oil for heating. There are about 270 days that Consolidated Industries need to rely on other business to earn money. If other business of Consolidated Industries in not operating very well, then investor could get nothing back by putting their money to this company and in this case, it would certainly weaker the argument. However, if other business is not bad so that this company can bring benefits to their investors, then this argument is actually quite valid.

To sum up, in order to fully evaluate this argument, we need to know more information about it’s stated and unstated assumptions which are climate forecasters are trust worthy enough to predict weather pattern for next few years, no new technology will be applied in heating for next several years and new houses will be designed to use oil for heating and Consolidated Industries’ other business is not bad or even good so that it’s profitable in total.

argument 60

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()