Arg-76
The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors:
"Over 80 percent of the respondents to a recent survey indicated a desire to reduce their intake of foods containing fats and cholesterol, and today low-fat products abound in many food stores. Since many of the food products currently marketed by Old Dairy Industries are high in fat and cholesterol, the company's sales are likely to diminish greatly and their profits will no doubt decrease. We therefore advise Old Dairy stockholders to sell their shares and other investors not to purchase stock in this company."
This excerpt argues that stockholders should sell shares and avoid purchasing Old Dairy Industry stocks bases on the belief that consumption and value of stock will diminish. The anticipated reduction of value is, in the argument, attributed to a recent study in which it is revealed that 80% of respondents indicated a desire to reduce their consumption of high-fat and high-cholesterol foods. The argument indicates that the study is relevant because people are consuming foods low in fat and cholesterol but Old Dairy Industrial is producing foods with standard levels of fats and cholesterol. The argument makes little sense.
【此段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument开头段结构，即：C – E - F的开头结构，首句概括原文的C(Conclusion)。接下来的一句话概括了原文为了支持他的结论所引用的E(Evidence)。最后尾句中给出开头段到正文段的过渡句，指出原文在逻辑上存在F(Flaw)。
【此段功能】
本段作为Argument开头段，具体功能就在发起攻击。首先，概括原文的结论：人们应当卖掉Old Dairy Industry(简称ODI)的股份并避免买入ODI。接下来分别列举了原文为了支持这个结论引用的证据：一是一项调查中80%的参与者表示要减少高脂肪高胆固醇食物，二是ODI生产高胆固醇食品，论据的归纳用于铺垫出正文段的具体攻击。最后点出原文存在逻辑错误，引出后面的分析。
First, as always, one must consider the statistical relevance of survey results and, when doing so, make sure that the results accurately reflect not only the respondents but also the target group as a whole. Without such proof, a link between the evidence and the claim cannot be supported. In the case of this specific study above, we can readily state that consumers do not necessarily make food-purchase decisions in strict accordance with their expressed desires. There are too many questions here to even consider basing a recommendation about stocks of a company based on a questionable survey about eating habits.
【此段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第一个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。
【此段功能】
本段作为正文第一段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：调查类错误。作者提出原文中所引用的调查可能不具有统计意义。进一步，作者指出，调查必须精确获得了respondent观点同时也要代表target group的整体意见，而消费者真实的消费习惯可能与他的desire是不相符的。
Secondly, the fact that low-fat foods are in abundant supply in food stores does not necessarily indicate an increasing demand for low-fat dairy products or a diminishing demand for high-fat dairy products. Absent evidence to the contrary, it is quite possible that consumers are buying other types of low-fat foods but are still purchasing foods high in fat and cholesterol.
【此段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第二个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。
【此段功能】
本段作为正文第二段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：错误因果。作者认为，“商店中供应很多low-fat食品”这一事实不一定意味着low fat产品需求量增长或high fat产品需求量减少。作者提出其他可能性：有可能人们在购买low fat产品的同时仍然会购买hat fat food.
Thirdly, for the sake of the argument, lets assume that the survey was trustworthy, the newsletter concludes too hastily that Old Dairy Industry profits will decline as a result. ODI could always raise the price of its dairy products to offset declining sales, and given a sufficient demand, ODI might still turn a profit despite the general consumer trend. Besides, profit is a function of not just revenue but also expenses. Perhaps ODI expenses will decline by a greater amount than its revenue; if so, then ODI profits will increase despite falling revenues. Or ODI might recognize the shift and drum up an innovative sales solution. None of these possibilities should be discounted.
【此段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第三个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。
【此段功能】
本段作为正文第三段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：profit类。作者认为原文关于ODI的profit会下降这一论断是不靠谱的。作者提出ODI可能通过raise price来offset降低的销量，甚至可能盈利。进一步，作者提出，profit与revenue和expense同时有关，如果expense减少，ODI依然有盈利的可能。或者ODI采用的一些新的销售战略来提高收入。
In sum, without additional information, prudent investors should refrain from following the newsletter's advice. To better assess the soundness of this advice it would be helpful to know the following: (1) the demographic profile of the survey's respondents; (2) the extent to which consumer desires regarding food intake accord with their subsequent behavior; (3) the extent of OD loyalty among its regular retail customers who might continue to prefer OD products over low-fat products even at higher prices; and (4) the extent to which OD might be able to reduce expenses to offset any revenue loss resulting from diminishing sales of OD products.
【此段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument结尾段结构，即：C – S的结尾结构，首先再次重申原文的站不住脚的Conclusion，接下来给出给合理建议Suggestion。
【此段功能】
本段作为Argument结尾段，具体功能就总结归纳+建议措施，首先再次重申newsletter上的建议不合理。接下来作者给出合理的建议：一要阐明调查对象的组成，二要说明人们接下来在选择food方面有着怎样的倾向，三要说明OD的顾客在产品涨价的情况下对OD的忠实程度，四要说明OD为了抵消减少的销量可惜削减的expense。结尾段的几条建议非常规整的隐射前面的几个主要错误，前后呼应，文章有力结尾，浑然一体。
满分因素剖析
一、语言表达
1. This excerpt argues that stockholders should ... bases on ... (标志性的
2. First, as always, one must consider the statistical relevance of survey results and, when doing so, make sure that the results accurately reflect not only the respondents but also the target group as a whole. (标志性的“调查类”错误分析语句，提出原文中引用的调查可能存在(1)参与者的回答与事实不符(2)参与者不能反映目标群体的真实情况)Without such proof, a link between the evidence and the claim cannot be supported. In the case of this specific study above, ... . (具体分析原文中的错误)There are too many questions here to even consider basing a recommendation ... .(再次重申原文中所引用调查可能存在调查类错误)
二、逻辑结构
本文是非常严谨的开头段-正文段1-正文段2--正文段3-结尾段的的五段论逻辑体系。开头段按照C-E-F的逻辑结构，顺利引出后文的分析。论证段中，从提出错误，到分析错误，到给出可能性，最后总结错误，层次清晰，衔接自然。结尾段总结全文，重申错误，给出合理化建议。这样一篇文章从开头到结尾逻辑严谨，内容清晰，圆满的完成了论证的作用。
正文段第三段值得借鉴
Thirdly, for the sake of the argument, lets assume that the survey was trustworthy, the newsletter concludes too hastily that Old Dairy Industry profits will decline as a result.
作者在这一段用到了，让步结构，即先假设前一个论断是正确的，在这一基础上提出文章的其他错误。这样使得论证段与论证段之间内容关联性更加紧密。
