- 精华
- 2
- 积分
- 1729
- 经验
- 1729 点
- 威望
- 132 点
- 金钱
- 839 ¥
- 魅力
- 426
|
69.The following appeared in a memorandum from a president of a company that makes shampoo.
“A widely publicized study claims that HR2, a chemical compound in our shampoo, can contribute to hair loss after prolonged use. This study, however, involved only 500 subjects. Furthermore, we have received no complaints from our customers during the past year, and some of our competitors actually use more HR2 per bottle of shampoo than we do. Therefore, we do not need to consider replacing the HR2 in our shampoo with a more expensive alternative.”
观点一:A widely publicized study claims that HR2, a chemical compound in our shampoo, can contribute to hair loss after prolonged use. This study, however, involved only 500 subjects.
反驳:作者认为the study about HR2的样本容量不够大,因此拒绝接受研究的成果,然而事实上如果抽样方法、研究方法和具体的操作都是科学合理的,500的样本容量并不会太小,研究成果也能够在一定程度上说明问题。(reveal the truth to some degree)。
论据一:Furthermore, we have received no complaints from our customers during the past year, and some of our competitors actually use more HR2 per bottle of shampoo than we do.
反驳:作者说during the past year(在过去的一年里),公司并没有收到顾客的complaints,然而如果研究的结论属实,那么只有a prolonged use of the shampoo contained HR2才会引起hair loss,一年的use time究竟能否归入a prolonged use的范畴有待商榷。
并且,在过去的一年里没有收到complaints不能说明该公司收到的complains很少,更不能证明其产品质量非常好,有可能在更长的销售史中,该公司收到的complains远多于average。
此外,competitors的行为(behavior)不能够成为决定本公司行为的理由。We can’t break the rules of our society just because other people do so.或许别的公司添加more HR2的行为已经造成了serious consequences,damage the health of customs了。
观点二:Therefore, we do not need to consider replacing the HR2 in our shampoo with a more expensive alternative.
反驳:作者根据上文陈述的理由得出这样的结论,由于上文的观点和论据都不够有说服力,可以说the basic assumption of this conclusion is irrational,这个结论自然缺乏可信度。 |
|