Argument 35 求拍！

jowett1985

The following appeared in a letter from theowner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex to its manager.

"One month ago, all the showerheads inthe first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified torestrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be. Although actualreadings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available,the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for SunnysideCorporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for afew complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have beenreported since the adjustment. I predict that modifying showerheads to restrictwater flow throughout all twelve buildings in the Sunnyside Towers complex willincrease our profits even more dramatically."

Write a response in which you discuss whatquestions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the predictionand the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain howthe answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The argument suggest that the modifyingshowerheads to restrict water flow throughout all twelve buildings in theSunnyside Towers complex will increase our profits even more dramatically basedupon the following two aspects. Firstly, modifying showerheads to restrictmaximum water flow will obviously result in a considerable savings for waterconsume. Secondly, no serious problems with showers have been reported sincethe adjustment, so most people are satisfied with this adjustment. By taking acareful scrutiny, I found it contain a lot of flaws and therefore, it is not credible.

First of all, the author assumes that mostof people find unaffected by the adjustment because there are just a fewcompliant about showerheads. But the author fails to setup solid connectionbetween the compliant from people and the cost of water usage of this company. Itis possible that most people have not yet felt the change of water pressureduring their working hour or even some companies locating in this building havechosen their new work places due to the limited water pressure, which can causeobvious decrease of water usage. Unless I receive a detailed and cogent surveyabout the attitude of representative people in this building, I can not believethe author's suggestion.

Secondly, the author assumes that restrictingthe maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be can effectivelyreduce the water consume of this building. However, the author has overlookedsome other factors that can affect the water usage. On one hand, water consumecan obviously affected by the season and temperature. Maybe this water pressureadjustment is performed during seasonal change and people take less shower thanlast, which can be the real reason that water usage drops greatly. On the otherhand, water usage also strongly related with amount of people in a building.When it comes to dramatically people leaving, the water usage can also beaffected. Unless the author can provide us with persuasive survey, includingthe daily activity of people related to water usage, to strength hisassumption, otherwise, I can not believe that reducing the maximum water flowcan not limit the monthly amount of water usage and the save water cost.

All last, the author assumes all twentybuilding will contain the same situation that water usage can be limited byreducing the maximum water flow. Unfortunately, this assumption is groundless.On one hand, different building may have different situation, such as amount ofpeople, different kind of company and so on, and the monthly water usage can beaffected by these factors dramatically. On the other hand, since the actual readingsof water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the SunnysideTowers complex can not assert the effectiveness of its plan.

In conclusion, the author's suggestionbenefits the Sunnyside Towers complex, but he overlooks a lot of importantfactors that can change the availability of this plan. The author shouldprovide more detailed and reasonable information to make his thesis morepersuasive.

竹林中人

非常感谢你的指点，感觉最近写AW稍微有点底了，虽然还是写得不好，但是至少在进步，谢谢！

-- by 会员 jowett1985 (2013/1/16 9:38:55)

嗯，加油，相信你现在看到题目至少有话说了，心里有底了，语言组织和段落组织慢慢加强

jowett1985

非常感谢你的指点，感觉最近写AW稍微有点底了，虽然还是写得不好，但是至少在进步，谢谢！

普渡哥

有点虎头蛇尾的感觉。

竹林中人

1.你首先质疑的应当是restrict maximum water flow to one-third of what it used to be是否真的会使得用水量减少，题目里面已经提到了actualreadings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available,很可能因为水的流速慢了，人们用的时间延长，使得很可能每次的用水相当甚至超过过去。2.对于抱怨的质疑，我觉得你写的还是不够直接，该点的那个点没说透。