我的第一篇argument,也请各位NN狂拍~~

lu05721025

AA：112. The following appeared in a memo to the Saluda town council from the town’s business manager.

“. By providing a well-equipped gym for Saluda’s municipal employees, we should be able to reduce the cost of our group health insurance coverage by approximately 50% and thereby achieve a balanced town budget.”

 

In this argument, the author concludes if we provide a well-equipped gym for Saluda’s municipal employees, the cost of group health insurance coverage would be reduced by approximately 50% and at the same time, the town budget would be balanced. At the first glance, this argument is convincing and its logical structure is perfect. But when we give it a deeper consideration, we’ll find the author has two obvious mistakes.

 

First, the author argues the improved availability of gym equipment can lead to the dramatic decrease in health insurance coverage, but an assumption that employees would exercise on these new gyms is necessary for the logic process. No evidence is stated in the argument to support this crucial assumption. For instance, although more exercise on gyms is able to reduce employees’ illnesses, and although we can increase the number of gyms easily, if employees’ exercising awareness not strengthened, their health condition wouldn’t get any improvement. Moreover, the author overestimated the extent to the percentage of decreased health insurance, a deficiency attributed to the inconsistency between the object as evidence and the final subject in conclusion.  Research indicates that those who exercise regularly are hospitalized less than half as often as those who don’t exercise, not the whole employees. So, even if the people who didn’t exercise often do that after the gyms provided, the whole health insurance will never reduce by 50%, instead less than it. In another word, the cost of heath insurance couldn’t be reduced as the author expected.

 

Secondly, the author’s conclusion that town budget will be balanced also lack of evidence. This conclusion underlies two assumptions: 1.the cost of increase gyms will not exceed the decreased insurance expenditure. 2. The other factors constituent town budget will remain. However, we can’t explicitly knew or implicitly infer these assumptions from the content. Although the health insurance decrease, if other expenditure the town have to pay increase more, for example, the education payments increase, more workers needed to mend gyms would be pay, and the promoting fees for gyms have to be done,  etc.  This conclusion will be very weakening.

 

In conclusion, this argument doesn’t succeed in providing compelling evidence for constructing more gyms and this activity will bring lots of economic benefits. If the author wants to make it more convincing, the assumption lacked in argument has to be provided or  the author has to give more facts and numbers to imply the assumption. The author should differentiate the availability of gyms and the actually frequency which people use gyms.  Moreover, the author has to make more accurate comparison when the topic relates different objects.  Additionally, the author must convince us that else expenses in town budget will not surpass the decreased insurance expected.

rio

以下是引用lu05721025在2007-8-19 21:12:00的发言：

AA：112. The following appeared in a memo to the Saluda town council from the town’s business manager.

“. By providing a well-equipped gym for Saluda’s municipal employees, we should be able to reduce the cost of our group health insurance coverage by approximately 50% and thereby achieve a balanced town budget.”

In this argument, the author concludes if we provide a well-equipped gym for Saluda’s municipal employees, the cost of group health insurance coverage would be reduced by approximately 50% and at the same time, the town budget would be balanced. At the first glance, this argument is convincing and its logical structure is perfect. But when we give it a deeper consideration, we’ll find the author has two obvious mistakes.

First, the author argues (that) the improved availability of gym equipment can lead to the dramatic decrease in health insurance coverage, but an assumption that employees would exercise on these new gyms is necessary for the logic process. No evidence is stated in the argument to support this crucial assumption. For instance, although more exercise on gyms is able to(can) reduce employees’ illnesses, and although we can increase the number of gyms easily, if employees’ exercising awareness (is) not strengthened, their health condition wouldn’t get any improvement. Moreover, the author overestimated the extent to the percentage of decreased health insurance, a deficiency attributed to the inconsistency between the object as evidence and the final subject in conclusion.  Research indicates that those who exercise regularly are hospitalized less than half as often as those who don’t exercise, not the whole employees. So, even if the people who didn’t exercise often do that after the gyms provided, the whole health insurance will never reduce (be reduced) by 50%, instead less than it. In another word, the cost of heath insurance couldn’t be reduced as the author expected.

Secondly, the author’s conclusion that town budget will be balanced also lack of evidence. This conclusion underlies two assumptions: 1.the cost of increase(ing) gyms will not exceed the decreased insurance expenditure. 2. The other factors constituent town budget will remain. However, we can’t explicitly knew or implicitly infer these assumptions from the content. Although the health insurance decrease, if other expenditure the town have to pay increase more, for example, the education payments increase, more workers needed to mend gyms would be pay, and the promoting fees for gyms have to be done,  etc.  This conclusion will be very weakening.

In conclusion, this argument doesn’t succeed in providing compelling evidence for constructing more gyms and this activity will bring lots of economic benefits. If the author wants to make it more convincing, the assumption lacked in argument has to be provided or  the author has to give more facts and numbers to imply the assumption. The author should differentiate the availability of gyms and the actually frequency which people use gyms.  Moreover, the author has to make more accurate comparison when the topic relates different objects.  Additionally, the author must convince us that else expenses in town budget will not surpass the decreased insurance expected.

整体来说这篇比较难.不过你的两个论点有交叉的地方,这不太好.最好是针对一个问题说清楚,第一段说人们是否去锻炼,第二段说budget的问题.

另外,多采用架设的方法来推翻原文的论述.换句话说就是举反例,可以增加很多字数.