Argument 174 球拍~~

2010202461

Argument 174 题目：
　　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 questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
提纲：
1. 没有餐馆的特色菜是海鲜不代表他们做的海鲜不好吃或者顾客不喜欢吃那里的海鲜
2. 国家范围内的调查不一定有代表性
3. 双收入家庭喜欢吃健康食物不等价于喜欢吃海鲜，作者没有说明海鲜属于健康食物
=======================================================================================
时间 38    字数 509
=======================================================================================
The argument achieved a conclusion that a Captain Seafood restaurant newly built whose specialty is seafood will make significant profit. To prove the argument, the author provided some seemingly good evidences that seafood is becoming increasingly popular in Bay City, and most families have a tendency to eat more healthful food, especially seafood. However, some questions can be asked by readers, and these questions are quite significant to the extent that the answers will weaken or strengthen the argument a lot.

In the first place, the author says that no currently operating restaurants in Bay City is specializing in seafood while the consumption of seafood is always mounting. But is the fact a lack of specialty in seafood a really matter? Specialties are always just a trick for restaurants to appeal customers and consequently, many customers don't take specialities of restaurants seriously. In many customers' perspectives, it is the quality and the palatability that really counts and truly attracts them. The author failed to provide evidence that seafood is not delicious in other restaurants. To make his argument more persuasive, the author has to consider the question above seriously.

In addition, the author asserts that a nationwide survey indicates that most of the two-income families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals. Although it sounds reasonable, the author neglects the fact that a nationwide survey is no doubt nationwide. In other words, such questions will come out, say, is this nationwide survey convincing enough when its result is used to making decisions in Bay City? There is a big probability that this result is only adaptable to other cities. No such evidence proves that the two-income families in Bay City are fond of eating outside home. If this concern from readers truly makes sense, the argument is definitely proved unpersuasive.

Finally, granted that the author's reasoning process evaluated above is sound, the author's claim suggests that many two-income families prefer healthful food may be less reasonable. Why the author categorized seafood in healthful food? This question will lead to readers' rumination. As we know, healthy food is quite a big class. Vegetables abundant in vitamins, meat fully filled with protein are all beneficial to human beings. And in some way, surfeit in seafood will increase the quantity of many harmful substances in human's blood, which indicates that this man isn't in a healthy state. To make the argument more convincing, the author has to list quite a lot reasons for his justifiability in classifying seafood in healthful food. Otherwise, the argument is not convincing enough to predict that Captain Seafood restaurant will benefit a lot from being specializing in seafood.

To sum up, this argument is qualified reasonable, and many questions can be asked by readers which will weaken the reasoning process. To make the argument more persuasive, the author has to provide more valuable evidence to prove some facts such as two-income families' always visiting Captain Seafood restaurant if the restaurant runs. Only by this way can we believe in the author that the restaurant can be popular and profitable.

普渡哥

理由很好，good job!

南林的孩子

学习了，谢谢

竹林中人

补充一点，就是这个city也许正因为人们喜欢吃seafood的时候也吃些其他类型的事物，才没有出现这种专做seafood的餐厅。

2010202461

恩，建议很好，谢版主~~