An argument about which company to be chosen In the argument, the writer suggests that the company should use Alpha rather than Zeta for their contemplated new building project. To support his position, the author cites several evidences. On the one hand, the building constructed by Zeta cost more in the expenditure of building, energy consumption and maintenance than the cost of the building constructed by Alpha. On the other hand, the Alpha has a stable workforce with little employee turnover. First of all, the author tells us that the two building are located in different regions with different floor plan. It is impossible to compare the cost and expenditure between two completely different buildings for their energy consumption, maintenance and the building cost. The two buildings have respectively necessary facilities to be built and different environmental conditions to dispose that must result in extremely disparities in all kinds of cost. For example, the building with 10 floors must cost much more than the building with 20 floors in almost every aspect no matter the process of building or the cost of maintenance. It is ridiculous to consider Alapha is better than Zeta based on the cost of the buildings they built in different regions with completely different buildings。 Moreover, the writer cites the stable workforce with employee turnover to support his choice of Alpha. There is no evidence showed that the stable employee's turnover will affect the ability of a company. And the writer does not provide any evidence to support this reason: what investigation is the statement based on? Who conduct the investigation and how? We can not trust the statement that based on no any scientific instigation and enough sample size. Even if the statement about employee turnover is trustable, it is still can not be convinced because the employee turnover is not proved to have nothing to do with the ability of construction. Another problem about the suggestion is that the new contemplated building project has distinct conditions that may different from the two buildings constructed by Alpha and Zeta. The position where the new project locates in is not told and may be in the third region that has great differences with the regions of the other two. Further more, even if the Alpha is better than Zeta, is there any other companies that may have higher ability to compete with them on the task of the new project? Without any conscientious comparison, we can not consider Alpha is the best one to be chosen.

My argument about helmets and bicycle related accidents In the argument, the author suggest that the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets in order to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle. To support his position, the writer provides follows evidences. A ten-year nationwide study shows that the proportion of bicyclists who wear helmets increased from 35 percent to 80 percent while another study during the same period reveals that the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200 percent.Then he infers that bicyclists take more risks because they feel safer with helmets. Firstly, it is obviously wrong to consider the correlation between the increasing of wearing helmets and the augment of the bicycle-related accidents as causality. The augment of the bicycle-related accidents may be caused by various reasons, such as the increasing speed of the cars on the road because of the progress of the functions of the cars during the ten years and the expanding of the number of the cars on the road in the period that may increase the possibility of the accidents. If the writer can not provide other evidence to prove which aspect is the main factors for the increasing of bicycle-related accidents, his inference is not convinced. Second, the writer said the bicyclists feel safer with helmets and then they take more risks as a result. This assumption is not believable. On the one hand, whether the bicyclists will feel safer or not when they wear helmets is supported by nothing. On the other hand, even if bicyclists feel safer with helmets, is it definite that they will make more risks? Many kinds of factors may cause taking more risks for bicyclists. For example, the characteristic of the bicyclists who prefer risk sports, culture during a certain period that more people may begin to participate in risk sports related to bikes, and so on. Moreover, it is questionable whether the second study is correspondent to the fist one with the same study area. The author only clearly told us the first study is nationwide, but not show us where the second one is based on. If the second study is just based on an investigation or data of several certain provinces or other countries, not nationwide in the same country, its result is not suitable to analyze together with the first study and the comparison in light of these two studies is invalid, as well as the author's assumption is false too.

People think that the problems they confront are more complex than that faced by their predecessor Many people often feel that the problem they confront are more complex and challenging than the problems faced by their predecessors. This feeling is mistaken and especially strong to the workers who get the new position in a company and employees who graduated from universities for short time. Generally speaking, this illusion would be eventually dispelled with increased knowledge and experience. First of all, it is universally acknowledged that the more knowledge a person has, the higher level he can grab the key of a problem through the various phenomenons. During the process people confront different situation and problem to solve, they will learn increasing special knowledge. The increasing knowledge would enable new workers to separate complex problem into several units that is simple to be analyzed and easier to be addressed. Finally, complex case becomes simple. Also, experiences would be concentrated in the process of solving difficulties hen the new employees encounter various situations everyday. It is no denying that experiences bring more skills and methods for workers to handle difficulties. And it is conceivable that full experienced staff have ability to find more help from different departments, which must be beneficial to successfully challenge those unbelivable problems. However, we can not eliminate the situation that people may confront harder challenging than the problems faced by their predecessors, particular in a fast developed company. Since this kind of company will encounter many new problems thy have not seen before. Even if experienced workers in the company are unfamiliar to this kind of situation. No one can get help from any experiences they have got before. I n this situation, people actually feel the problem they are facing is more complex and challenging than that faced by the predecessors. Apparently, this kind o f situation is casual, not common. But the experienced workers still have advantages to solve them because they have more sources to find other help. By what have been discussed, I agree with the statement that the illusion of facing more complex and challenging than the predecessors would be dispelled by increased knowledge and experience, even if some fast developed company may really confront some new extremely hard thing.