91Ó°ÊÓ

Office manager: I will not order recycled paper for this office. Our letters to clients must make a good impression, so we cannot print them on inferior paper. Stationery supplier: Recycled paper is not necessarily inferior. In fact, from the beginning, the finest paper has been made of recyeled material. It was only in the 1850 s that paper began to be made from wood fiber, and then only because there were no longer enough rags to meet the demand for paper. In which one of the following ways does the stationer's response fail to address the office manager's objection to recycled paper? (A) It does not recognize that the office manager's prejudice against recycled paper stems from ignorance. (B) It uses irrelevant facts to justify a claim about the quality of the disputed product. (C) It assumes that the office manager is concemed about environmental issues. (D) It presupposes that the office manager understands the basic technology of paper manufacturing. (E) It ignores the office manager's legitimate concern about quality.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding the Office Manager's Concern

The office manager refuses to order recycled paper because they believe it is inferior and will not make a good impression on clients. This is a concern about the perceived quality of recycled paper.

02

Analyzing the Stationery Supplier's Response

The stationery supplier argues that historically, the finest paper was made from recycled materials, suggesting that recycled paper is not inferior. However, this response relies on historical information rather than directly addressing the quality of current recycled paper.

03

Assessing How the Supplier's Response Addresses the Concern

The supplier focuses on the historical use of recycled materials but fails to provide evidence or arguments about the quality of modern recycled paper. Therefore, the supplier's response is not focused on the real issue: whether today's recycled paper meets the office manager's quality standards.

04

Evaluating the Multiple-choice Options

We need to determine which option best describes how the supplier's response fails. Option (B) states that the supplier uses irrelevant facts to justify a claim about the quality of the product. This aligns with the misuse of historical information, as the supplier doesn't address the actual quality of modern recycled paper.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

• Full Textbook Solutions

  Get detailed explanations and key concepts

• Unlimited Al creation

  Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

• Ads-free access

  To over 500 millions flashcards

• Money-back guarantee

  We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Argument Evaluation

Viable solutions often begin with carefully evaluating arguments. Here, the office manager has a clear stance: they are concerned about the potential inferiority of recycled paper. They argue that the quality directly affects the company’s image.

The stationery supplier counters with a historical perspective, stating that recycled materials have always been used to produce fine paper. This brings us to the importance of identifying relevant arguments.

• Is the historical argument relevant to the current quality of recycled paper?
• Does the supplier address the specific concern about modern recycled paper quality?

In this context, the evaluation reveals the supplier’s argument may not be perfectly aligned with the main concern. Instead of historical quality, the focus should be on contemporary standards and impressions.

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking involves actively analyzing and understanding information to solve problems effectively. In the exercise, the skill is used to dissect the interactions between the office manager and the stationery supplier.

Firstly, we need to recognize the core issue: the manager’s perception of quality. The response from the supplier needs critical examination - it's more about historical facts rather than current quality.

• What assumptions are being made by both parties?
• How can these assumptions affect the perceived validity of their arguments?

By critiquing these assumptions, you can see how logical reasoning shapes understanding. Everyone should strive to ask probing questions that challenge surface-level information to reach deeper insights.

Analyzing Responses

When analyzing responses, it's essential to consider how effectively they address the core issues raised. Here, the supplier didn’t tackle the manager’s concern about modern quality perception of recycled paper. Instead, they diverted the focus to historical aspects, which isn’t directly relevant.

There are several factors to analyze in the supplier's response:

• Does the response offer new information that changes the manager's viewpoint?
• Is there any factual evidence provided about the quality of current recycled paper?

Reflection on these factors uncovers that a successful response should bring clarity and focus on present-day facts, supporting the argument with solid, contemporary data. This approach can bridge the gap between concerns and reassurance, offering a more satisfactory resolution to the issue.