shiyi
Jul 23, 2011
Writing Feedback / [more alternative explanations]- Argument-15-by shiyi [2]
[15] The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.]"Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little impact on our customers. In fact, only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
In this argument, the author claims that butter can be replaced by margarine and this change has had little impact on the customers. In order to support his opinion, the author points out several facts presented in the argument and suggests that either these customers do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine . It seems logical, at first glance, to agree with the author. However, if we examine the facts carefully, we can find one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation.
At first, the author cites a survey indicates that only about 2 percent of customers have complained this change, and assumes that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. I have to point out that the customers don't complain not mean they are happy. In fact, because we don't know how long these restaurants have been supplying the margarine, instead of butter, to the customers. May be it is very recent, and most customers may consider this change as an expedient. That is why the customers don't complain this change. Besides that, we don't know what portion of HPH customers order meals calling for either butter or margarines. It's entirely possible that a significant percentage of the customers don't order pancakes, or prefer other food instead. If this percentage is greater, we don't surprise the author could get the conclusion.
In addition, the author cites that many serves have reported a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine. We can also find alternative explanations. Perhaps some customers express their disappointments by not returning to the restaurants. Or the author may use fuzzy quantity to cover the real facts. For example, there may be 200 restaurants in this region, and only 20 serves provide such reports. What's more, these serves may have 200 customers everyday, and about 100 of them complain this change. The author use "many" and "a number" to persuade me to agree with him. But this evidence is far too vague to meaningful.
At last, there may be another reason to explain this phenomenon. Perhaps people in the Southwestern United States real like margarine.
In a word, one or more explanations can plausibly account for the fact presented in the argument. The proposed explanation is not unique or unexceptionable.
[15] The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.]"Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little impact on our customers. In fact, only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
In this argument, the author claims that butter can be replaced by margarine and this change has had little impact on the customers. In order to support his opinion, the author points out several facts presented in the argument and suggests that either these customers do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine . It seems logical, at first glance, to agree with the author. However, if we examine the facts carefully, we can find one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation.
At first, the author cites a survey indicates that only about 2 percent of customers have complained this change, and assumes that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. I have to point out that the customers don't complain not mean they are happy. In fact, because we don't know how long these restaurants have been supplying the margarine, instead of butter, to the customers. May be it is very recent, and most customers may consider this change as an expedient. That is why the customers don't complain this change. Besides that, we don't know what portion of HPH customers order meals calling for either butter or margarines. It's entirely possible that a significant percentage of the customers don't order pancakes, or prefer other food instead. If this percentage is greater, we don't surprise the author could get the conclusion.
In addition, the author cites that many serves have reported a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine. We can also find alternative explanations. Perhaps some customers express their disappointments by not returning to the restaurants. Or the author may use fuzzy quantity to cover the real facts. For example, there may be 200 restaurants in this region, and only 20 serves provide such reports. What's more, these serves may have 200 customers everyday, and about 100 of them complain this change. The author use "many" and "a number" to persuade me to agree with him. But this evidence is far too vague to meaningful.
At last, there may be another reason to explain this phenomenon. Perhaps people in the Southwestern United States real like margarine.
In a word, one or more explanations can plausibly account for the fact presented in the argument. The proposed explanation is not unique or unexceptionable.
