[argument] Argument 34 求拍

The vicepresident of human resources at Climpson Industries sent the followingrecommendation to the company's president.

"Arecent national survey found that the majority of workers with access to theInternet at work had used company computers for personal or recreationalactivities, such as banking or playing games. In an effort to improve ouremployees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring ofemployees' Internet use from their workstations. Using electronic monitoringsoftware is the best way to reduce the number of hours Climpson employees spendon personal or recreational activities. We predict that installing software tomonitor employees' Internet use will allow us to prevent employees from wastingtime, thereby increasing productivity and improving overall profits."

In this argument, a conclusion is drawn outthat installing software to monitor employees’ Internet use will allow thecompany to prevent employee from wasting time, thereby increasing productivityand improving overall profits. To substantiate this conclusion, the authorclaims that a national survey found many workers use computers for recreationalactivities during work time. The author also claims that using electronicmonitoring software is the best way to reduce the time wasted on recreationalactivities on computer. Although at first glance it may seem reasonable and persuasive,close scrutiny of each piece of evidence reveals the argument is unreliable.

First of all, the author’s claim is based on a survey which showedthat majority of workers used computer for recreational activities. In fact,the survey does not give the specific number of hours for that each employeespends on computer and how well it is conducted, so it is unconvincing. The underlyingassumption is that spending time to play computer will restrict theproductivity. It is possible that most of employees surf the Internet to find valuableinformation solve the problems related to their duties instead of recreational activitiessuch as playing games, banking and watching movies.  In this case, the working efficiency willcertainly get enhanced, so will the productivity.

Secondly, the author points out that using electronic monitoringsoftware is the best way to reduce the time wasted on recreational activitieson computer. But the author doesn’t illustrate why the monitoring software isthe best way or give the potential consequence. It is very likely thatinstallation of the software make some employees feel fettered and underpressure, which all will cause the low efficiency and productivity. Besides,the company can punish the employee by deducting the payments while detectedwasting time on recreational games. The author's reasoning is definitely not comprehensiveunless the author can demonstrate that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.

Finally, although the monitoring software can effectively reduce thetime for recreational activities on computers, it doesn’t necessarily increaseproductivity and improve overall profits. There are many other factors whichmay affect the productivity and profit. It is possible that many employeesspend time on chatting with colleagues or telephone call which is beyondmonitoring of the software but may result bad effects on the productivity.Besides, the cost of installing the monitoring software is possibly more thanthe added revenue brought about by the increasing productivity. To reach thecited conclusion, the author must explain why none of them is able to sustain.

As it stands, the arguer’s argument mentioned above relies on doubtfulevidence or unsound reasoning. Regardlessof whom the author is, many aspects of this conclusion have been ignored orunderrated. To better evaluate the conclusion, the author should reasonmore convincingly, cite some logical evidence, and take every possibleconsideration into account.