GRE作文范文大全（126）
|
In conclusion, the letter’s author fails to adequately support the recommendation that Cedar replace Good-Taste with Discount. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide clear evidence that Cedar employees are dissatisfied with Good-Taste’s food, and that they would be more satisfied with Discount’s food. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information comparing the two companies’ menus to determine which is more varied and caters to those with special dietary needs. Argument 68 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 five-hundred-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 costs only $500 per employee---a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course." In this argument, the personnel director of Acme Publishing claims that Acme would benefit greatly from improved employee productivity if every employee takes the 3-week Easy-Read seminar at a cost of $500 per employee. To support this daim the director points out that many other companies have daimed to benefit from the seminar, that one student was able to read a long report very quickly afterwards, and that another student saw his career advance significantly during the year after the seminar. However, close scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it accomplishes little toward supporting the director’s claim, as discussed below. First of all, the mere fact that many other companies benefited greatly from the course does not necessarily mean that Acme will benefit similarly from it. Perhaps the type of reading on which the course focuses is not the type in which Acme Publishing employees often engage at work. Moreover, since Acme is a publishing company its employees are likely to be excellent readers already, and therefore might stand to gain far less from the course than employees of other types of companies. Secondly, the two individual success stories the argument cites amount to scant evidence at best of the course’s effectiveness. Moreover, the director unfairly assumes that their accomplishments can be attributed to the course. Perhaps both individuals were outstanding readers before taking the course, and gained nothing from it. Regarding the individual whose career advanced after taking the course, any one of a myriad of other factors might explain that advancement. And the individual who was able to read a long report very quickly after the course did not necessarily absorb a great deal of the material. 216 Thirdly, the director assumes without warrant that the benefits of the course will outweigh its costs. While all of Acme’s employees take the 3-week course, Acme’s productivity might decline significantly. This decline, along with the substantial fee for the course, might very well outweigh the course’s benefits. Without a complete cost-benefit analysis, it is unfair to conclude that Acme would benefit greatly should all its employees take the course. 相关资料 |
