Argument1

1、作者对当地居民对健康生活关注程度的判断是没有说服力的。作者仅用某几种产品、某几种培训班的火爆来偷换“健康生活”的概念；并且没有提到火爆的原因，可能只是因为培训班规模实在太小造成了火爆的假相。小孩那个例子更是反例，从小锻炼可能将来更加的不需要健康产品。

2、即便当地居民对健康生活足够关注，并不能得到该公司在此一定可以大幅盈利的结论。公司的主要产品是健康食物(或者其他)，而健康产品有很多种，对健康生活的关注也就随之有很多种，所以高关注度不一定导致对该公司特定健康产品的高需求。

3、确定分店的位置，需要更精确详细的调查，是否存在条件更好的地区适合开分店？当地有没有没有调查过的劣势条件？ 可能当地购买力水平很低，而以前并没有在物价水平如此低的地方开设过这样的分店而导致经验不适用：物价水平低导致销售量很大也无法提升营业额。或者当地虽然普遍关注度比较高，但是居民总数并不多等等。

Argument2

1、没有证据表明，是布置和染色方案带来了地产增值。

2、即使是布置和染色方案的功劳，由于地域和时间具体条件的不同，该方法不一定适用。

3、想要地产增值可以有很多正常的办法，不用半疯癫的刷浆玩儿。

 Argument79

1、Longhaul公司的举措无法证明是提高驾驶员工资对降低事故率有帮助。

2、进一步的，这个survey的结果并不能反映收入高就能令驾驶员安全驾驶。

3、作者简单考虑了两点而忽视了曾经提到的training standards等其他要素，没有对其他可能的要素进行预测分析。

——题目——
The following was written as a part of an application for a small business loan by a group of developers in the city of Monroe.
‘A jazz music club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise. Currently, the nearest jazz club is 65 miles away; thus, our proposed club, the C Note, would have the local market all to itself. Plus, jazz is extremely popular in Monroe: over 100,000 people attended Monroe’s jazz festival last summer, several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe, and the highest-rated radio program in Monroe is ‘Jazz Nightly,’ which airs every weeknight. Finally, a nationwide study indicates that the typical jazz fan spends close to $1,000 per year on jazz entertainment. It is clear that the C Note cannot help but make money.’
——正文——
It seems to be a good idea to hold a jazz music club in Monroe. According to the application there is few competitor, a good number of potential customers, what is more, they may spend considerable money here. Everything looks good, however, I find the application not so convincing.

Customers are not always that lazy. There is no clear reason that people will absolutely choose the nearer club when they want to join one. When one wise person who does be interested in jazz want to choose a jazz club, there are several feature he should consider. The price may be important, if he can totally not afford client fee of a club, he will absolutely not choose this club; How the service is is also of large importance, which makes the direct impression. People usually spend a whole weekend in his favorate club, attending club is not a frequent conduction, so, the distance between the club and customers’ home may take small part in customers’ decision.

In another aspects, whether jazz is popular is totally different thing with whether there will be customers of a new jazz club. Many people have several hobbies, but have only joint few clubs. Maybe someone just like the air of Jazz but can not play which makes him have no hopeness to join a club. There are stil many such factors. Admitted that the population does mean a considerable potential customers, The applicant does not provide even enough evidence of the population. He says over 100,000 people attended the festival, but what is the total number of local dweller? How is the attendance condition in past years? Is it clear that those who attendent this festical are all jazz fans? People always attendent a festical when is free, it brings happiness.

Let’s have a look at the nationwide study which indicates the average spending condition of jazz. There are two weak point of this. First, a nationwide study does not necessarily indicates local condition. Statisticlly, study result in a small district can be very different with a nationwide average result. The fact that the typical jazz fan spends close to $1,000 per year on jazz entertainment can not applied to Monroe without specific survey. Second, there are many ways of jazz entertainment, such as books, Video Discs, Tapes, Instruments and so on. We have not seen any material about how the $1000 was spent, so, it is a vague evidence too.

In summary, without maturely discussion of possible competition, without convincing survey of the popular degree in Monroe something, if I have right, I will not make this application pass.

——题目——
The following is a memorandum from the director of personnel to the president of Get-Away Airlines.
‘Since our mechanics are responsible for inspecting and maintaining our aircraft, Get-Away Airlines should pay to send them to the Quality-Care Seminar, a two-week seminar on proper maintenance procedures. I recommend this seminar because it is likely to be a wise investment, given that the automobile racing industry recently reported that the performance of its maintenance crews improved markedly after their crews had attended the seminar. These maintenance crews perform many of the same functions as do our mechanics, including refueling and repairing engines. The money we spend on sending our staff to the seminar will inevitably lead to improved maintenance and thus to greater customer satisfaction along with greater profits for our airline.’
——正文——
In this memo, the director suggests that their company should pay to send their mechanics to the Quality-Care Seminar and he recommend it will be a wise investment. To support his viewpoint, the director cite an automobile racing industry who sents its maintenance crews to the same Seminar as evidence. He believes the seminar will works and thus to greater customer satisfaction and finally bring their company greater profits. It seems reasonable at the first glance, however, I find this memo unconvincing in several aspects.

Firstly, the director try to say that since these maintenance crews perform many of the same functions as mechanics in their company do, what happened on these maintenance crews will happen again on their employees. Obviously, it is unwarranted. “Many of the same” does not mean “exactly the same”, as a result, more or less, there are something different between these two kind of jobs. However, the director provides no material mentioning how the seminar works on the specific content of the job of maintenance crews. In another word, we have no idea about whether the seminar helps these maintenance crews on the part of their job which is the same with their company’s mechanics.

Another problem with the memo is that the director simply treat a consequent event as a result. According to the words in this memo, we know that the seminar is about Quality-Care, and after attending the seminar, the maintenance crews improved markedly. But, does anyone know how the maintenance improved? Did they improve on Quality-Care or some aspect else? Even assuming they did improve on Quality-Care, is there any evidence telling they did learn something from the seminar which help them improved in their job? It is quite likely that their company hold another special Course on Quality-Care which bring them necessary knowledge which is the real reason of their improvement. Without these information cleared, it is hard for me to believe this Seminar will certainlly makes the same improvement on their company’s mechanics.

Finally, I can not see any relationship between mechanics’ improvement and customer satisfaction, let it alone greater profits for their airline. As we know, customer satisfaction concern mostly to those who directly serve for them, such as air hostess, public security ensurers etc, customers do not see mechanics directly. Admitted, mechanics play an important role in a airline’s daily proceeding, but they does not influence the customers satisfaction directly. What’s is more, customers stisfaction is not the only factor which affect the profit. People consider many factors before they choose a air-lilne finally. For example, price is a very important one. Maybe you have hi customer satisfaction, as well as a high price, there are still many things to do with your company.

To sum up, what is above is the factors which weaken the memo.

如果一段观点所引用的证据互相之间有联系，应该怎么批驳呢？

比如这样一段观点
“今天是元旦。我去年胖了20，今天体重180, 我决定制定这么这么一个减肥40斤计划，使我能够在年底的时候体重到达标准160以参加参加‘体重最接近160斤大赛’并且夺冠”

问题有：
1、今年会和去年一样长20斤
2、减肥计划能折合让他减40斤
3、能不能夺冠的问题

一种批驳方式：
“你以为你能再长20斤阿，就算你长了20斤，减不掉40不是白搭？ 就算减到40斤，你也不一定能夺冠阿”
另一种
“你以为你到达160就能夺冠啊？ 能不能减40斤到160还是个问题呢。再说说不定40斤倒是减了，可你没长20斤肉呢也不行啊”

哪一个好呢？