69. The following appeared in a memorandum from the 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.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The president of the company that produces Glabrous Shampoo argues against removing the ingredient HR2 from the shampoo even though a scientific study claims that prolonged use of HR2 can contribute to hair loss. Three reasons are cited as the basis for this decision. First, it is argued that since the scientific study involved only 500 subjects, it can be disregarded. Second, none of Glabrous customers have complained of problems during the past year. And, finally, Glabrous competitors use more HR2 per bottle than Glabrous. The presidents decision is problematic in several respects.
To begin with, the fact that the scientific study on HR2 involved only 500 subjects is insufficient grounds to dismiss the results of that study. If the subjects for the study were randomly chosen and represent a diverse cross section of the population of shampoo users, the results will be reliable regardless of the number of participants.
Next, the scientific study determined that prolonged use could contribute to hair loss. While prolonged use was not defined in the memorandum, the fact that none of Glabrous customers have complained of problems during the past year is not a reliable reason to believe that problems will not arise in the future.
Finally, the fact that Glabrous competitors use more HR2 in their products than Glabrous uses is irrelevant to the question of whether Glabrous should remove HR2 from its product. Moreover, rather than providing a reason for not removing the compound, this fact serves better as a reason for doing so. By removing HR2 from its product Glabrous could gain an edge over its competitors.
In conclusion, the reasoning in this argument is not convincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that the study was biased or was based on too small a sample to yield reliable results.
雅思阅读做题技巧全介绍(short answer questions)
雅思阅读长难句怎么破
雅思阅读做题技巧全介绍(sentence completion)
雅思阅读材料:悉尼大学的图书馆借书规则
雅思阅读做题技巧全介绍(全文主旨题)
雅思阅读中的动词不定式讲解
雅思阅读文章的阅读步骤及重点
雅思阅读做题技巧全介绍(其他题型)
九类雅思阅读关键词整理
雅思阅读做题技巧全介绍(table completion)
雅思考生阅读考试问题解析
三步五点 学术类雅思阅读的基本解题思路
雅思阅读重点注意词汇
雅思阅读审题的2点重要性
如何分配雅思阅读考试时间最合理
快速完成雅思阅读的方法:不能逐句读
雅思阅读高分提升攻略
细数雅思阅读高分需要注意的小细节
雅思阅读8种题型的答题攻略大全
雅思阅读背景:英国发布100部必读书籍清单
雅思阅读做题技巧全介绍(观点搭配题)
雅思阅读的八个常见问题介绍
雅思阅读中的重点信号词
雅思阅读简答题的解题技巧和注意事项
长期雅思阅读备考攻略
雅思阅读材料推荐:多读学术类期刊杂志
雅思阅读解答技巧之因果搭配
雅思阅读备考之词汇句子答题
雅思阅读考试高分关键点
雅思阅读获取高分四项原则
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |