The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine devoted to regional life.
“Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helios’s unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region’s manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
1， 因为H地区industrial and manufacturing比较attractive，所以那里的工人很可能只适合做这类的，如果缺乏能够做innovative technologies and research的工人labor pool，那么很可能导致失败。
2， H的低失业率更可能成为坏处。因为比如有less available work force。企业必须提高wage才能吸引他们。提高了COST。
In this argument corporations are urged to consider the city of Helios when seeking a new location or new business opportunities. To support this recommendation, the author points out that Helios is the industrial center of the region, providing most of the region’s manufacturing jobs and enjoying a lower-than-average unemployment rate. Moreover, it is argued, efforts are currently underway to expand the economic base of the city by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies. This argument is problematic for two reasons.
To begin with, it is questionable whether the available labor pool in Helios could support all types of corporations. Given that Helios has attracted mainly industrial and manufacturing companies in the past, it is unlikely that the local pool of prospective employees would be suitable for corporations of other types. For example, the needs of research and development companies would not be met by a labor force trained in manufacturing skills. For this reason, it’s unlikely that Helios will be successful in its attempt to attract companies that focus or research and development of innovative technologies.
Another problem with the available work force is its size. Due to the lower than average unemployment rate in Helios, corporations that require large numbers of workers would not find Helios attractive. The fact that few persons are out of work suggests that new corporations will have to either attract new workers to Helios or pay the existing workers higher wages in order to lure them away from their current jobs. Neither of these alternatives seems enticing to companies seeking to relocate.
In conclusion, the author has not succeeded in providing compelling reasons for selecting Helios as the site for a company wishing to relocate. In fact, the reasons offered function better as reasons for not relocating to Helios. Nor has the author provided compelling reasons for companies seeking new business opportunities to choose Helios.
题库原题：97. The following appeared as part of an article in a computer magazine.
“A year ago Apex Manufacturing bought its managers computers for their homes and paid for telephone connections so that the managers could access Apex computers and data files from home after normal business hours. Since last year, productivity at Apex has increased by 15 percent. Other companies can learn from the success at Apex: given home computers and access to company resources, employees will work additional hours at home and thereby increase company profits.”
Notice that only managers were bought computers by Apex, whose productivity indeed rose 15 percent as the result. It is different from the assumption made in the article, which stated that if all employees were brought computers, they would work extra hours at home. Managers ≠ all employees
A. This argument suffers from a fallacy of post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
B. Next, the author fails to provide any evidence that installing home computers for managers really led to the increase of Apex’s productivity.
1 home access 和increase productivity因果关系错误
4 hasty generalization。有两个，一是把apex推广到所有公司，二是把managers推广到了所有employees
论点： 1，错误的analogous 类比，各公司是不同滴，不能照搬滴；
In this article the author attributes Apex Manufacturing’s 15 percent increase in productivity over the past year to its decision to equip its manager with computers and paid telephone connections for their homes so that they would access company computers and files from home after normal business hours. On the basis of Apex’s experience the author recommends that other companies follow Apex’s example and provide computers and access to company resources to their employees. The author believes that such a policy would increase productivity and profits for other companies, just as it did for Apex. The author’s line of reasoning is questionable for several reasons.
First, the author assumes that Apex’s increase in productivity is due to its equipping its managers with home computers and access to company resources. However, the only evidence offered in support of this claim is the fact that Apex’s increase in productivity occurred after the home computers and after-hours (adv. 工作完毕后) access was provided. Unfortunately, this evidence is insufficient to establish the causal claim in question. While temporal precedence is one of the conditions required to establish a causal relationship between two events, by itself it is not a sufficient condition. Consequently, it is possible that Apex’s increase in productivity is not related to its decision to equip its managers with computers and after-hours access in the fashion required by the author’s argument.
Second, the author assumes that Apex and other companies are sufficiently similar to warrant a conclusion based on an analogy between them. Even if we accept the view that Apex’s increase in productivity was brought about by its policy of enabling its managers to work from home, differences between Apex and other companies could nullify this result. Lacking detailed information about Apex and the other companies in question it is difficult to assess the author’s conclusion.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to provide additional evidence for the claim that Apex’s decision to provide its managers with home computers and access to company resources was responsible for its increase in productivity. Furthermore, it would be necessary to show that Apex and other companies are sufficiently similar to justify the analogy between them.