1.(1次)
原始寂静：
V1(BY: xueleng12): 据说考的是大学医院比社区或私人的差。请问是题库的哪一篇啊?
原题：
The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper:
“There is a common misconception that university hospitals are better than community or private hospitals. This notion is unfounded, however: the university hospitals in our region employ 15 percent fewer doctors, have a 20 percent lower success rate in treating patients, make far less overall profit, and pay their medical staff considerably less than do private hospitals. Furthermore, many doctors at university hospitals typically divide their time among teaching, conducting research, and treating patients. From this it seems clear that the quality of care at university hospitals is lower than that at other kinds of hospitals.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
报纸的健康板块上的文章：
有一种普遍的错误观念认为大学医院比社区或私人医院更好。这个想法是无根据的，我们地区的大学医院较之私人医院，少雇15%的医生，对患者的治愈率要低20%，总体利润要小得多，给一户员工的待遇比私人医院低很多。而且，很多大学医院的医生将他们的时间分为教学，直到研究和看病几部分。从此可明显看出大学医院的服务质量比其他医院低。
参考思路：
1.Insufficient sample：这里将的是“我们地区”，不具有代表性
2.False causal relationship：因为学校医生要上课，做研究，照顾病人，同时工资少，所以说care lower，无因果关系
3.Gratuitous assumption：假设雇佣医生少，付工资就会少没有依据
4.从一个医院的情况就推广到整个太草率
5. 治愈率低可能是因为接受的患者得的病都比较罕见等原因造成的
6. 工资低，总体利润低，时间分配给教学都不能一定说明质量差。可能其他福利好，接受的病人少，教学研究有助于进步
参考范文：
In this argument the author concludes that university hospitals provide no better care than private or community hospitals. The author bases this conclusion on the following claims about university hospitals: the ones in this region employ 15 percent fewer doctors; they have a 20 percent lower success rate in treating patients; they pay their staffs less money; they make less profit than community hospitals; and they utilize doctors who divide their time between teaching, research and treating patients. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
The most egregious reasoning error in the argument is the author’s use of evidence pertaining to university hospitals in this region as the basis for a generalization about all university hospitals. The underlying assumption operative in this inference is that university hospitals in this region are representative of all university hospitals. No evidence is offered to support this gratuitous assumption.
Secondly, the only relevant reason offered in support of the claim that the quality of care is lower in university hospitals than it is at other hospitals is the fact that university hospitals have a lower success rate in treating patients. But this reason is not sufficient to reach the conclusion in question unless it can be shown that the patients treated in both types of hospitals suffered from similar types of maladies. For example, if university hospitals routinely treat patients suffering from rare diseases whereas other hospitals treat only those who suffer from known diseases and illnesses, the difference in success rates would not be indicative of the quality of care received.
Finally, the author assumes that the number of doctors a hospital employs, its success rate in treating patients, the amount it pays its staff, and the profits it earns are all reliable indicators of the quality of care it delivers. No evidence is offered to support this assumption nor is it obvious that any of these factors is linked to the quality of care delivered to patients. Moreover, the fact that doctors in university hospitals divide their time among many tasks fails to demonstrate that they do a poorer job of treating patients than doctors at other kinds of hospitals. In fact, it is highly likely that they do a better job because they are more knowledgeable than other doctors due to their teaching and research.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to demonstrate that university hospitals in this region are representative of all university hospitals, as well as establishing a causal link between the various factors cited and the quality of care delivered to patients.
2.(1次)
原始寂静：
V1(BY: lxlsx): 汽车公司有两条生产线，一条生产线是手工生产奢侈品(luxurious)汽车，效率低;另一条普通生产线生产普通的汽车，效率高。现为了提高公司的profit，要cease奢侈品汽车的生产线因为其手工生产的汽车效率太低。
参考思路：
1. 生产数量少不代表利润少，薄利多销的利润不一定比高价少销的利润多
2. 考虑品牌效应，一个品牌拥有其自己的奢侈品，或是质量极高的产品可以彰显地位，提高品牌知名度。比如奔驰车刚出来的时候，其他车在打价格战，惟独奔驰价格高，质量好，成为上层社会的人们为彰显身份的座驾。
3. 不能保证都换成standard line以后生产的摩托车数量会“激增”
4. 考虑供过于求的情况
5.没有那么多机械设备来生产加产的standard motorcycle
3.(1次)
原始寂静：
V1(BY: burmester): 音像店和衣服店那题，服装店要采纳音像店的广告宣传方法
原题：
The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Carlo’s Clothing to the staff:
“Since Disc Depot, the music store on the next block, began a new radio advertising campaign last year, its business has grown dramatically, as evidenced by the large increase in foot traffic into the store. While the Disc Depot’s owners have apparently become wealthy enough to retire, profits at Carlo’s Clothing have remained stagnant for the past three years. In order to boost our sales and profits, we should therefore switch from newspaper advertising to frequent radio advertisements like those for Disc Depot.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
Carlo's服饰老板给员工的备忘录：
由于Disc Depot，相邻街区的音像店从去年开始新的电台广告，它的业务显著增长，从商店人流量的大量增加就可以看出。当Disc Depot的老板显然已经足够富有可以退休时，Carlo's服饰的利润3年来一直停滞不变。为了促进我们的销售和利润，我们应该像DiscDepot一样从报纸广告转向经常的电台广告.
参考思路：
1.All thing are equal：remain unchanged 过去三年利润不变不代表未来不会增加
2.False analogy：DD与C的服饰店无可比性，所以不能说广告就适用C的服饰店
3. Gratuitous assumption：不能根据人流量大就假设销售量增加
4.False causal relationship：没有说电台广告与业务量增长有必然因果关系
5.Either or choice:可以宣传的不是只有电台广告
参考范文：感谢iuxuan8821~
In this argument, the author reaches the conclusion that Carlo’s Clothing should switch to frequent radio advertisements from newspaper advertising just like what Disc Depot did. Reasons are offered in support of this recommendation. First, the large increase in foot traffic into Disc Depot shows its dramatically increasing profits. Second, the dramatically increasing profits of Disc Depot are due to the new radio advertising campaign. In addition, frequent radio advertisements can boost the sales and profits of Carlo’s Clothing. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further inspection reveals that it contains several critical logic flaws and the line of reasoning is invalid.
To justify what he claims, the author first assumes that the large increase in foot traffic into the music store proves its dramatically growing business. But this is false assumption unless other possible explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps the large crowd simply came to listen to the music but did not tend to buy any CDs in the store.
Secondly, in order to strengthen the argument, the author points out that the dramatically growing business of Disc Depot was due to their new radio advertising campaign. However, there are several reasons why this might not be true. In fact, the growing business of Disc Depot can be result from many reasons other than the new radio advertising. For example, the music store introduced new management style or applied better sales method.
Finally, even though supposing the new radio advertising campaign is responsible for the dramatically growing business of Disc Depot, the same strategy may not work well on Disc Depot. Because the argument rests on the assumption that Clothing store is similar to music store is so weak that the success of one kind of store may not ensure the success in other kinds of stores. If it does not suit other stores, the campaign will not work.
In conclusion, this argument is not compelling as it stands. Accordingly, it fails to prove the conclusion that Carlo’s Clothing should switch to frequent radio advertisements from newspaper advertising since it does not address the assumptions I have already raised. To make this claim more reliable, the author would have to provide evidence that the dramatically growing business of Disc Depot was direct result from their new radio advertising campaign which is also applicable to the clothing shop. Further, only with more concrete evidence could this argument become more thorough and better evaluated.
