A recent sales study indicates that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent during the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants whose specialty is 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 healthful eating. Therefore, the new Captain Seafood restaurant that specializes in seafood should be quite popular and profitable. Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. 最近的销量调查显示Bay City餐馆的海鲜菜肴的消费量比过去五年增加了30％。而现在该市还没有专门经营海鲜菜的餐厅。而且，Bay City的大多数家庭是双收入家庭，一次国家调查显示这类家庭在家做饭的数量比十年前显著减少，同时他们更关注健康饮食。因此，在Bay City开设一家新的专营海鲜食品的C餐馆将会非常受欢迎而且有利可图。
The arguer asserts that open a new CS restaurant that specialized in seafood should be quiet popular and profitable in Bay City. To support this argument, he cites a survey shows that consumption of seafood in BC has increased by 30 percent during the past five years, while the majority of families which are represented always eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals through a nationwide study in Bay City are mostly two-income families and concentrate on a healthy diets. Although this argument may seem reasonable at first glance,it is in fact flawed in several aspects with close scrutiny.
In the first place, the arguer assumes that the 30 percent increase in consumption of seafood during the past five years showed by the arguer can reflect the true condition of the markets of seafood. Even though it is entirely possible, the arguer offers no definite statistics about the consumption.It is very likely that five years ago there are only a little part of people would like to eat seafood so that the consumption today is also small even though there has been a 30 percent increase. Without accounting for and ruling out these and other alternative situations,the arguer cannot bolster the recommendation.
In the second place,a threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the nationwide survey concerning two-income families. The nationwide study may not reflect the same situation when it comes to the Bay City. It is entirely possible that actually the families in Bay City do not follow these general trends.Even though they eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals and express more concern about healthy eating, it does not mean that the families are interested in eating seafood. Hence, to reach the conclusion, the arguer must explain why none of these alternatives will happen in reality.
Finally,even though the families in Bay City are usually interested in eating seafood, the suggestion that open a restaurant specializes in seafood will be popular and profitable is unreliable. It is just as possible that there are already many restaurants offering seafood so that the provision is enough. Competition will be more severe if we open a new restaurant specializes in seafood. Moreover, perhaps a large number of native residents does not like seafood for their daily meals linking to their eating habits.Thus, the arguer’s reasoning is definitely flawed unless the arguer can convince me that these and other possible situations are unlikely.
To sum up, the arguers argument mentioned above is unpersuasive as it stands .In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should reason more convincingly, cite some evidence that is more reliable, and take every possible consideration into account.
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-10-5 19:34:13
收藏
收藏
楼主
