113题ARGUMENT
16290
The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.
"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a 500-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read would cost Acme only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when you consider the benefits. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, to improve productivity, Acme should require all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.
以下为本人拙作 望斧正
In this argument, the arguer claim that Acme should require all of employees to take the Easy Read course to improve productivity. It is seems reasonable at first glance in that the arguer give an example about two graduates. Well-intension as the argument is, we still can not draw a conclusion about productivity and Easy Read course without rule out those unwarranted questions.
Briefly, are these companies and Acme comparable? This is a fundamental question about all of the assumptions. Chances are that these companies are some small companies which employees ,lack of basic ability of fast reading, who have weak academic and educational background. What is more, the Acme is a global competitive company whose employees are graduated from famous universities such as MIT or Harford, having trained about fast read during their universities times. Without concrete answers about this critical question, the arguer’s recommendation is open to doubt.
Moreover, the arguer’s examples are unsubstantial about his\her conclusion. Could the Easy Read course benefit two graduates or they have essential aptitude or talents in fast read. In spite of the fact that one can fast read 500-page report the other one rose from assistant to manager, the arguer’s conclusion that these results are comes from Fast Read course is unsound. First, what are the topic or content about this 500-page report? Perhaps, it is only a easy commercial report; this graduate has already familiar with it. Furthermore, how about the educational level and the ability of take care of company’s affirms. Image it, he\she is an inspire and splendid assistant to help the manager who rose him\her. It is quite reasonable to rose him\her instead of him\her takes a Fast Read course. As a consequence, there is no absolute casual relationship between the Fast Read course and these two graduates succeed.
In a sense, though it will cost 500 dolliers per captid, it is not a warrant to the productivity and profits. How many staff the Acme company has? It is a crucial question about the cost of this program. Additionally, who can help to do their work during the three weeks course. As we all know, the profit are determined not only revenue but costes. Maybe that the Acme company has 200 employees necessary to take the Fast Read course, there is extraordinary costs and enormous amount of work to be ignored. As a result, the revenue of the course, if there is any, cannot meet the costs of it; the Acme company will lose money. Will the benefits of the course overweigh its costs? The recommendation about taking the Fast Read course to all of their employees is questionable until the arguer take this significant questions into consider.
The arguer’s conclusion and recommendation about taking the Fast Read course to improve the productivity has some important flaws can not be ignored in his\her reason line.Hence, the above questions are considerable before hasty draw a conclusion.
"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a 500-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read would cost Acme only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when you consider the benefits. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, to improve productivity, Acme should require all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.
以下为本人拙作 望斧正
In this argument, the arguer claim that Acme should require all of employees to take the Easy Read course to improve productivity. It is seems reasonable at first glance in that the arguer give an example about two graduates. Well-intension as the argument is, we still can not draw a conclusion about productivity and Easy Read course without rule out those unwarranted questions.
Briefly, are these companies and Acme comparable? This is a fundamental question about all of the assumptions. Chances are that these companies are some small companies which employees ,lack of basic ability of fast reading, who have weak academic and educational background. What is more, the Acme is a global competitive company whose employees are graduated from famous universities such as MIT or Harford, having trained about fast read during their universities times. Without concrete answers about this critical question, the arguer’s recommendation is open to doubt.
Moreover, the arguer’s examples are unsubstantial about his\her conclusion. Could the Easy Read course benefit two graduates or they have essential aptitude or talents in fast read. In spite of the fact that one can fast read 500-page report the other one rose from assistant to manager, the arguer’s conclusion that these results are comes from Fast Read course is unsound. First, what are the topic or content about this 500-page report? Perhaps, it is only a easy commercial report; this graduate has already familiar with it. Furthermore, how about the educational level and the ability of take care of company’s affirms. Image it, he\she is an inspire and splendid assistant to help the manager who rose him\her. It is quite reasonable to rose him\her instead of him\her takes a Fast Read course. As a consequence, there is no absolute casual relationship between the Fast Read course and these two graduates succeed.
In a sense, though it will cost 500 dolliers per captid, it is not a warrant to the productivity and profits. How many staff the Acme company has? It is a crucial question about the cost of this program. Additionally, who can help to do their work during the three weeks course. As we all know, the profit are determined not only revenue but costes. Maybe that the Acme company has 200 employees necessary to take the Fast Read course, there is extraordinary costs and enormous amount of work to be ignored. As a result, the revenue of the course, if there is any, cannot meet the costs of it; the Acme company will lose money. Will the benefits of the course overweigh its costs? The recommendation about taking the Fast Read course to all of their employees is questionable until the arguer take this significant questions into consider.
The arguer’s conclusion and recommendation about taking the Fast Read course to improve the productivity has some important flaws can not be ignored in his\her reason line.Hence, the above questions are considerable before hasty draw a conclusion.
0条回复