ARGUMENT 32 求指点！！

tongxiao123

32) The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing.
During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep.
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 memo, the vice president of Quiot Manufacturing claim that in order to increase productivity they should shorten work shifts. To justify him claim, the president make a comparison with Panoply, which has a less percentage of job accidents and shorter workshift. The president also gives a saying of experts to support his claim. Careful scrutiny of this argument, we can find several logical flaws in it.
   To start with, the arguer cites  a data in which compared the accident rates between  Quiot Manufacturing and Panoply. However, this cannot illustrate any conclusion. First, the arguer assumes that two plants are comparable. Since the president did not give any specific information of them, it is quite possible that the Quiot is a plant manufactures steel or other materials with higher risks, while Panoply is a plant producing clothes. Without any details in these two plant, the arguer cannot rely on this poor evidence to support his claim. In addition,The arguer fails to indicate some data in other years between these two plants. Maybe only past year marked a higher percentage in Quiot., in this case, a shorter work shifts is not that useful.
  Even assuming that Quiot Manufacturing has a always high accident rate, the arguer rests on a further assumption that the only reason for the problem is the  fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers.  It is possible that the plant has a long history and have not refreshed its machines for many years, or there is a financial problem in this factory so that they cannot afford the new machines. Also, maybe this bad situation is due to the poor management of employees in the plant, they do not pay enough attention to the safety regulation when working. Either of the situation will reduce the convincability of the argument.
 In additon, the arguer also assumes that after the work shifts has shortened, the employees will use these time to sleep. However, it is a unfounded situation. Maybe they will use these time to entertain or take part in other activities, in this way, the claim has no effect on changing the current situation.
 In sum, the president rests his claim on several assumptions ,thus making the claim unconvincing.To better support his claim, the president should provide enough evidence that two plants are comparable and the Quiot Manufacturing's accident rate in other years. The arguer should also justify the real reason for the high rate and evaluate possible scenarios after the suggestion has been taken.

竹林中人

从内容上看第三点显得匆忙，不够充实。另外，我建议在质疑每一个点的时候，先指出题目的依据和他的结论，然后指出它是怎么推得的，接着再指出其问题，最后再指出其它的可能性或者由题目的依据得到的其他的可能的不同的节律等，这个过程最好很自然很细致，不必急于下结论，重在把这个分析过程写出来