A U.S. lease-to-own chain considers whether to test its business i.docx

A U.S. lease-to-own chain considers whether to test its business
in Mexico
Stan Windham walked into the newest Coe's store in South
Tucson. As CEO of the lease-to-own chain, he was eager to see
how his 1,000th location was performing. Aubrey Merrin, the
store manager, met him at the door. "Mr. Windham, so good to
see you, sir. The new employees are real excited to meet you.
And of course I want to update you on how everything's going,"
Aubrey said as he ushered Stan inside. "We're doing great so
far. Open for less than a month and over 100 customers already.
It's a real good start, sir, a real good start." "You don't have to
call me 'sir,' Aubrey," Stan said, realizing it was probably
hopeless. "Congratulations. I've said it before, but I'll say it
again: I appreciate your taking this on."
Aubrey had transferred from the Coe's up in Flowing Wells,
where he'd been the store manager for 10 years. He was raising
three kids on his own, and although this location meant a
slightly longer commute, he'd jumped at the opportunity.
"I'm honored, sir, to be opening a brand-new store," he said.
"And with the economy as it is, I'm just happy to be working for
a growing company." He pointed up at the celebratory banner
that still hung in the front of the store. "Everyone else I know is
talking about layoffs, not grand openings."
Stan felt lucky, too. When his father, Terry, opened the first
Coe's back in the 1950s, he certainly hadn't set out to enter a
countercyclical industry. He'd invested $600 in 32 chairs to rent
out to auction houses, and the business expanded from there
into party equipment and sickroom gear. In the 1970s he shifted
to residential furniture and other household goods. Terry prided
himself on conservative growth--when he was starting out, he
wouldn't buy a second item in a category (say, a sofa or a
refrigerator) until the first one had been rented--and he took a
"tough love" approach with his employees, especially with his
son. When Stan started as an assistant manager, in 1984, the

same year Coe's went public, Terry had expected him to work
harder than everyone else to prove his worth. And Stan had.
Coe's now took in over $2 billion a year in revenues.
Stan looked around at the room displays. "We thought this
might be a tricky location for us with Mr. Rental all over South
Tucson," he said.
Aubrey nodded. "Yes, sir, I was worried about that, too--market
saturation. I've read about it. But we're different from Mr.
Rental."
Unlike many of its competitors, Coe's had always emphasized
ownership: More than half of its customers became owners by
the end of their leases, compared with 25% for Mr. Rental.
Coe's offered a monthly payment schedule and a shorter
contract period (12 months versus four or five years), which
meant higher fees each month but a lower cost of the eventual
purchase. Also, Coe's managers were trained to approve lease
agreements only for people who could afford the payments.
"Are we getting any of Mr. Rental's customers?" Stan asked.
"Some. But I think our strong opening is thanks to the recession
more than anything. We're seeing people in here who'd never
have considered Coe's before--wealthier folks who are nervous
about committing to big-ticket items outright."
Aubrey greeted a customer, shaking the young woman's hand
and offering balloons from the Grand Opening display to her
two toddlers. He really had a way with people. Ten years ago,
Stan had debated about hiring him, put off by his lack of sales
experience. But Terry had said, as he always did, "You can
teach people to sell, but you can't teach them to smile." And
he'd been right. Managers like Aubrey, who fostered immediate
trust with customers, were much more successful when it came
to collecting the monthly payments. Once Aubrey had
introduced the customer to a salesman, he returned to Stan.
"Can I ask you a question, sir?"
"Yes, Aubrey, as long as you stop calling me 'sir,'" Stan said
with a laugh. "I've been thinking about how well Coe's is doing
here, with all the new stores. And I think there's a market that

you should consider: Mexico." Aubrey was shifting back and
forth on his feet. "So many of our customers are from there
originally, and they've all got family back home.…I just, I think
it would be a good, er, strategic move for the company, sir. And
I would be more than happy to go down and train the staff there.
You know I speak Spanish, and my kids do, too. My late wife
was Mexican."
"As a matter of fact, that's a conversation we've been having at
headquarters," Stan said. "We've been considering Mexico, and
Europe. Our investors expect us to keep growing. Still, we need
to do it smartly." Stan had led a successful expansion into
Canada in the 1990s when he was the COO, and Coe's had over
100 stores there now. But a venture into Puerto Rico a few years
before had failed miserably:He'd been forced to close the pilot
store after only 12 months. Too many customers had skipped
their payments and walked away with the products, and the
store manager hadn't been able to handle the massive amount of
collections. Several analysts had downgraded the chain's stock
as a result, and its share price had plunged. Stan didn't want to
make the same mistake twice. "It's a good time for us and
potentially a great market," he told Aubrey. "But it's also a
risky time."
A Second Opinion
On his way back to Phoenix, Stan stopped at a Circle K off
Route 10 to grab a cup of coffee. The woman behind the counter
noticed the Coe's logo on his shirt and smiled.
"Coe's! Do you work there?"
"I do," Stan said. This was exactly why he wore the shirt
instead of a suit.
"My whole house is from Coe's. My daughter's, too."
Which one do you shop at, Carmen?" Stan said, reading her
name tag.
"Down on East Florence Boulevard. Right next to the Walmart.
Cesar's my guy. I go to see him every month, make my payment.
My TV is from you, my couch. Every morning I think, 'Gracias

por Coe's,'" she said, quoting one of the company's Spanish-
language commercials.
"I'm glad to hear it." Stan handed her two dollars for the coffee.
"You need to open a store in Mexico! My mom is down in
Hermosillo. She can't believe all the things we can get up here.
Plus free delivery, free repairs. She's telling all her friends
about it." Carmen passed him his change. "They've got nothing
down there like it. Walmart is there, but they only take cash or
credit, and my mom doesn't have either. Other stores will give
you credit, but nobody will rent stuff to you like Coe's."
Stan smiled. First Aubrey, now a customer: Mexico was popular
this morning. And a few people at headquarters were on the
bandwagon, too. His business development team had gotten
some good market data about the border cities-- Matamoros,
Monterrey--and some leads on potential partners.
Stan left the store and grabbed a Coe's hat from his trunk.
When he returned and handed it to Carmen, she laughed: It said
"Gracias por Coe's!" in big white letters.
A Prudent Path
Back at the office, Stan stopped by to see his CFO, Carl
Amirault. He wanted to be sure everything was ready for the
executive team meeting later that day. They were set to discuss
the firm's five-year growth strategy--again. Stan told him about
Aubrey's suggestion and the chatty cashier at the Circle K.
"Are we letting employees and customers dictate our expansion
strategy now?" Carl joked. "If you'd run into an Irishman,
would you be pushing for Europe?"
"Well, Europe is on the table, too. But Mexico might be easier--
maybe starting small with two or three stores in Juárez and
testing the model. Your own team's analysis showed how many
people don't have access to credit there." "Yes, but we're still
mapping the regulatory environment," Carl warned.
The two men often sparred like this. In fact, whenever one of
them took a stand, the other tended to push harder in the
opposite direction. Stan knew his father had wanted that kind of
tension--in fact, had nurtured it. As he mentored both of them

up through the ranks, he had fostered debate between them,
always telling Carl to be prudent while encouraging Stan to
think big and trust his gut.
"The environment has to be better than here," Stan said. In the
height of the recession, U.S. consumer protection advocates had
attacked the rent-to-own industry, claiming the total price of
goods--often 60% to 90% higher than that of traditional
retailers--amounted to predatory financing and caused undue
hardship for customers. Stan and other industry CEOs argued
they were providing a much-needed service: giving people
without access to credit a chance to acquire household items, in
a way that suited their cash flow, preserved their credit, and
allowed them to eventually own the item outright. It worked just
like a car lease--and those weren't seen as predatory. And if at
any time leaseholders couldn't make their payments, they could
return the items with no penalty and resume the contract where
they left off whenever their financial situation improved. But he
knew the fight was far from over.
"Karen says Congress is going to be all over this in the spring,"
Stan said, thinking of his discussion with Karen Werner, the
general counsel of Coe's, the previous day.
"I doubt it. They have bigger fish to fry," Carl argued. "Besides,
you can't legislate what customers want."
"That's true. Still, I'm just concerned. The bottom line is we
need to diversify our risk. And Latin America might be a
relatively inexpensive place to do that, considering the lower
transportation, labor, and real estate costs," Stan said. "There
are plenty of growth opportunities right here in the U.S. We
should be putting a store next to every Walmart. We have the
same customer base, and people need an alternative when
they've been turned down for credit. Or we could experiment
with our product line, try the rent-to-own concept for goods
beyond basic household items. We've got lots of options without
taking a risk abroad. We're not seeing shrinking margins yet,"
Carl said. "Yet," Stan shot back.
"But why would we add the complication and risk of

international expansion when it's not necessary? In this
economy, investors want growth, but they also want to play it
safe," Carl said. "And I don't need to remind you about Puerto
Rico."
Stan expelled a deep breath. "I'm worried that things are going
to get too restricted here, and if that happens, we may regret not
having gone elsewhere to continue growing."
The Voice of Experience
Back in his office, Stan asked his assistant to get his father on
the line.
When Stan had taken the reins, two years earlier, Terry had
promised to stop coming into the office every day. He'd said the
company was in good hands and he was looking forward to
retirement. But Stan knew that wasn't entirely true. His dad
loved the business and missed it. Hell, he wouldn't be surprised
if Terry still put on his Coe's shirt every morning.
"Hi, Dad," Stan said.
"There isn't an emergency, is there?"
"Nope, nope. I was just checking in. I was down at the South
Tucson store this morning."
"A thousand stores. It's hard to believe. How's business?"
"Good. Aubrey's doing great. Listen, I need some advice about a
strategy meeting we have today. I've been giving serious
thought to Mexico. The more I look into it, the more attractive
it seems. The market is large, and the competition is weak.
People don't have a similar alternative."
"OK," Terry said. "But don't forget about Puerto Rico. We had
the trouble with shrinkage, and we couldn't find the right
personnel. It was a tough market." Stan gave an exasperated
sigh, but not loud enough for his father to hear. "We certainly
learned some lessons," Stan acknowledged. "But to tell you the
truth, I'm concerned about building a growth strategy solely on
U.S. revenues. We've been talking about going international for
a long time. The analysts are all over us about future growth."
"What about Europe?" Terry asked. "The culture and the
regulatory environment there are a lot more like ours." "That's

not necessarily a good thing. Besides, the cost of opening stores
is just as high as here." "What does Carl say?" Terry asked.
Stan smiled. His father was so predictable.
"His team's analysis says we have a 35% chance of success in
Mexico, but I think they were too conservative. Carl feels that
the U.S. is the only market we know well enough and that we
haven't fully tapped it, especially with the down economy," Stan
said. "He wants us to focus on increasing profitability, not go
into uncharted territory. It's too risky, he says."
"If only you had a dollar for every time Carl said 'It's too
risky,'" Terry joked. "But he has a point," he added more
seriously. "We're doing so well in the domestic market. Why
wouldn't we stay focused and see what happens with the
economy?"
"Because it's a crowded, expensive market. It makes a wide-
open field where there's a real need for our business look very
appealing. We've always said we wanted to help as many people
as possible get access to the things they need. An affordable
path to ownership while still making a profit, right?" "Right.
We just need to be sure we don't hurt the company trying to do
that." There was a long pause. "Of course, it's your company
now, son. Your company, your call."
Should Coe's expand to Mexico?
Critical Thinking PHIL 1290 Final Exam 1
Final Exam
Read the following short essay, and then write a 3-5 page
response (12-point font, double-spaced,
normal margins, no cover page, no binders). Your response
should do the following three things: (1)

state what the main conclusion of the essay is; (2) state what the
most important premises (including
sub-conclusions) are—i.e., state which premises are most
important if the argument is to rationally
convince its audience; (3) evaluate the quality of the argument,
giving detailed reasons to justify your
evaluation. For purposes of evaluation, assume that the speaker
is a contemporary Canadian
philosopher and the audience is a group of students in
Introduction to Philosophy, all of whom have a
basic knowledge of statistics.
What Makes People Happy?
Yolanda Ypres
Some people might be inclined to claim that the meaning of life
is this: you should learn about all the
things that matter most to you, and devote yourself to them. But
wait a minute! Can you devote
yourself to just anything you care about and expect life to be
satisfying? You can devote yourself to
your children and they can turn out to be spoiled brats, strategic
planners for Monsanto, or other
disagreeable types. Or similarly, you can devote yourself to a
political cause, only to see it lose all its
political battles. Whether devotion to your causes is the
meaning of life or not, it sure doesn’t sound
like a recipe for happiness. Surely, if we want to be happy, it
would be safer to devote ourselves to
the only thing that guarantees happiness if attained: happiness
itself.
Now, the obvious question to ask is: “What makes people
happy?” Fortunately, something

systematic is known about this. The description of a few
different experiments and studies should
make it possible to make some quite well-informed guesses
about where happiness lies.
To begin, consider an experiment performed by Daniel
Kahneman and his colleagues.
1
In this
experiment, human subjects were first required to hold a hand in
painfully cold (14° Celsius) water
for 60 seconds, and then afterwards to hold it in cold water for
90 seconds, with the first 60 seconds
of exposure at 14° Celsius and the final 30 seconds slowly
climbing to 15° Celsius. 80% of subjects
who experienced this slow warming as decreasing the pain
preferred to repeat the 90-second
condition rather than the 60-second condition, even though it
involved more time in unpleasantly cold
water! This experiment shows that what matters most to
people’s happiness is not just what they feel
at the moment, but also the overall pattern of these experiences
over time. Bad experiences that get
less bad before ending are found to be better than shorter bad
experiences that just end suddenly.
From this, we can conclude that the happiest lives will be the
ones that end well—the ones that
display an “upward trend.” The alternative—that the happiest
lives are those that display a downward
trend—is obviously absurd. Who would want to start life as a
famous athlete, only to end it as an
ignored, alcoholic homeless person?
So the challenge to us, as seekers after a happy life, is to figure
out how to have a life with an

upward trend in happiness. How can we make our lives better as
they go on? Obviously, this cannot
involve each minute being happier than the previous minute.
Life is always throwing little obstacles in
our way which bring us sadness, no matter how we might try to
arrange things otherwise. The
upwards trend in happiness has to be something that is seen year
by year, or even decade by
decade, rather than moment by moment. Put this way, however,
the problem seems easier to deal
with, more tractable. Our challenge is to find out what we can
add to our lives to make them better.
Here, some empirical research can again help out.
1
Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B., Schreiber, C., and Redelmeier,
D. 1993. “When more pain is preferred to less:
Adding a better end.” Psychological Science 4, 401-5.
Reported in Kahneman, D., Diener, E., and Schwartz, N.
(eds.) 1999. Well-Being: The foundations of hedonic
psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
2
According to Argyle (1999),
2
“many surveys have correlated educational level with measures
of
happiness, either using number of years of education received

or the level attained (for example,
high school, college). In all such studies, a small positive
correlation has been found, of the order of
.10.”
3
So getting an education is a good step, bringing a certain level
of happiness. It has to be
admitted, though, that Argyle also finds that getting an
education raises expectations for incomes,
which can lead to frustration if things don’t work out. So after
getting a good education, one needs to
get a well-paying job. What about marriage? “Marriage has
often been found to be one of the
strongest correlates of happiness,” Argyle reports, though still
the correlation isn’t much more than
.15. You might think that this is a mere correlation—that it
doesn’t show that marriage causes
happiness, since it might be the case that naturally happy people
are more likely to get married, but
since (as Argyle says) 90% of people get married at some point,
this isn’t likely to affect the statistics.
From all this, it seems that the next step in a life with an
upwards trajectory in happiness is to get
married. Kids, however, are out. Reported marital satisfaction
goes down with having kids, especially
when the kids are teenagers. Having teens, it seems, would put a
downward dent in the happiness
trend in one’s life, and so would not be the route to happiness.
What about our happiness when we become old? Here there are
many considerations, but I want to
deal with one in particular. Avoiding a significant, long-term
negative trend in happiness can be very
difficult when a person is faced with a chronic and debilitating

disease, and this is a problem that
faces older people much more often than younger people. Some
forms of cancer, for instance,
cause constant pain which cannot be alleviated without
basically rendering the victim unconscious or
delirious. Senility can decrease a person’s quality of life for
years before bringing death. And so on.
These sad facts must be confronted when thinking about the
future. Is there any way to plan for
happiness, knowing that such disease is a possibility? Perhaps
meditation, or a loving family, can do
much to make even these conditions bearable, so that one’s
happiness need not decrease so much.
But perhaps there are kinds of suffering that can only be
avoided by death. If so, then the happiest
life in some particular case might be one that the individual
chooses to cut short, rather than end
unhappily. Fortunately, we can hope that medical improvements
(and continued support of publicly
funded health care!) will save us from ever having to face such
a situation.
Now of course, all this needs to be seen in a statistical context.
For one particular person, the route
to happiness might be that she spends all her money on a classic
convertible car and spend the next
twenty years cruising up and down the California coast, taking
odd jobs in bands no one has heard of
to pay for gasoline, eventually dying in a car wreck just like
James Dean or Albert Camus. But this
probably is not the path of the happiest life imaginable for most
people. Given the scientific studies
just described, the route to happiness for most people is quite
likely to be a familiar one: a good
education, a good job, and marriage (though no kids). Each of
these steps is known to increase

average levels of happiness, and so we can expect that, on
average, taking each step in turn is the
best way to ensure that the happiness in one’s life tends, in the
long term, to go up.
Note: You may wish to consult your fellow students, parents, or
friends about your essay. Feel free
to do so. However (and this is crucial), any help you get must
be acknowledged in your paper. If your
mom reads your paper over to check your grammar, include a
footnote or endnote thanking her for
this service. If you discuss the general ideas you have with a
friend, write “Thanks to Lisa Kudrow for
a helpful discussion” or something of the sort. If you borrow a
specific idea from someone, put in a
footnote saying “I got this idea from Mark Improvement” or
whoever. Also important: although I’m
all in favour of talking about philosophy with others, you are
not permitted to actually write papers
together, or to write up shared outlines, or to share written work
with one another. Conversation is
good for thought; shared written work is a good way to get
charged with plagiarism.
2
In Kahneman, D., Diener, E., and Schwartz, N. (eds.) 1999, op.
cit., p.355.
3
For those who don’t know, this means that (.10)
2

percent, or 1%, of the variability in measured happiness seems
attributable to level of education.
Critical Thinking PHIL 1290 Assignment 3 1
Assignment 3
Letter To The Editor
Start by finding an article (news story, or whatever) written by
a person, in which that person makes
an argument that exhibits a failure of critical thinking. The
argument must appear in the print mass
media, be in English, and be published sometime between the
first day of class and the due date of
the assignment. (Articles published both in print and on the
Internet are also acceptable, even if you
only have access to the online format.) Please pay attention to
the date: assignments based on
materials published outside of the permitted time period will not
be accepted.
Having found a bad argument, write a response (up to one page
in length, double-spaced, 12-point
font, normal margins, no cover page or binders) in which you
explain the problem. Your response
should take the form of a letter to the editor. You do not have to
use the technical jargon developed
in class: you are encouraged, in fact, to write your letter as if

you actually intended to mail it to the
appropriate person. You need not deal with every single
problem you found in the person’s whole
essay, letter, or whatnot. Just pick out a problematic argument
made by the author, one that exhibits
a failure of critical thinking, and use your letter to point out the
problem. Put your mailing address at
the top and your name at the bottom, and otherwise treat the
assignment as if you were really writing
a letter to the editor. Finally, submit your letter and a copy of
the article to which you are responding
with the date attached.
Before you start your assignment, here are some tips, which you
may find helpful. Be sure that it is
the author of the article who actually makes the argument you
criticise! Do not write about a bad
argument quoted in an article but not actually endorsed by the
article’s author. Failure to comply with
this requirement will result in a grade of D or F (depending on
how obvious it was that the argument
was not the author’s own), so please do pay attention to this
point.
Some people have a hard time finding arguments in the mass
print media. If that sounds like you,
you might start by looking in newspapers or magazines.
Columns by columnists, editorials, and
letters to the editor are usually good bets, though some
magazines and newspapers are better than
others. Macleans, in my experience, rarely contains arguments
made by the authors of the stories,
though often others’ arguments are quoted (so watch out!).
Sports Illustrated is a source, which has
worked for some students in the past. When it comes to
newspapers, the Winnipeg Free Press has

proven to be a good source in the past, and the Globe and Mail
has also been used. It is usually
possible to gain access to a free online version of a newspaper
if you are already a subscriber. You
may also check online news services to get opinion pieces. If
this is the case, copy and paste the
article, and include it with your letter. If you do this, make sure
you properly reference the article. If
you use a paper article, you will need to get the articles scanned
and then you can include it in your
final document for submission. Please note that if you scan an
article it must be pasted into a Word
document. Instructions on how to do this can be accessed in
your course site.
When you actually sit down to write your response, you will
naturally find yourself writing a fairly
hostile letter. After all, you are criticising someone else’s
reasoning! Even so, as a matter of good
style and good manners, avoid insulting the person to whom you
address your letter. Try to write in a
style, which is firm but polite. This won’t affect your grade, but
it is good practice.
For this assignment, you are allowed to get help with spelling
and grammar, but NOT with content:
everyone must do this assignment on his or her own. Shared
work will be treated as plagiarism, and
dealt with severely. Be sensible here: don’t show work to a
friend to “give an idea” for what to do. If
the friend borrows your work, you will both be dealt with as
plagiarists, and no one wants that.

Assignment 2
Please read the passage below. Write a very short essay (1 page,
12-point font, single or double-
spaced, normal margins, no cover page) in which you evaluate
the argument(s) contained in the
passage below.
Your response should do two things. First, clearly state the
argument made by the author of the
passage. Once you have isolated the argument from any
extraneous material, analyse the argument
into the premises, sub-conclusions (if any) and conclusion. I
would prefer you to do this in point
form, simply listing the premises, sub-conclusions (if any) and
conclusion. Be sure to make a very
clear statement of each point. (So, for example, do not use the
word ‘I’ to refer to anyone but
yourself.) Second, evaluate the quality of the argument, giving
reasons to justify your evaluation.
Write out your evaluation in the form of a very, very short
essay: a long paragraph or two should do
nicely. For purposes of evaluation, assume the speaker is
Brandon Bean, a member of this section
of Critical Thinking, and assume that his audience is you, the
class as a whole.
Prejudice and Pre-judgement
Brandon Bean
Prejudice is always bad. That much is clear. But it is also
misunderstood. As many people know, the

word ‘prejudice’ comes from ‘pre-judgement’. The idea is that
the prejudiced person is the one who
makes a prior negative judgement about some people without
knowing whether or not those people
really deserve that judgement. Most people assume that pre-
judgement is automatically prejudice:
that it is automatically bad. But they are wrong.
Imagine you are asked for spare change by a man who appears
drunk, and who sounds a bit
aggressive. You can see and hear that he is a member of certain
groups (beggars, drunks, men,
people who take an aggressive tone of voice). You will
automatically form a belief about how likely it
is that this person will take a hostile action towards you. Will
you judge this person the same as a
sober, polite-sounding teenaged girl who asks for a quarter to
make a phone call? No. You will judge
the beggar as more dangerous. You will make a negative
judgement about him based on the groups
he belongs to. But is this wrong? No.
Why is it not wrong to make this negative judgement? This is a
complicated question, that I cannot
answer perfectly. However, it seems to me that part of the
answer is this: this negative judgement is
statistically accurate. It is more common for drunken male
beggars to threaten or commit assault on
strangers than it is for sober teenaged girls. And a rational
estimate of risk cannot be improper. It
would be wrong to continue to treat the man as more dangerous
than the girl if one learned more
about the two that showed otherwise – if one learned that the
man had never committed assault, but
that the girl was just recently released from prison after an
armed robbery, say. But this does

nothing to show that reasonable beliefs about people are
themselves bad. Negative judgements are
ok after all.
friends about your assignment. I
encourage you to do so. However (and this is crucial), any help
you get must be acknowledged. If
your mom reads your assignment over to check your grammar,
include a footnote or endnote
thanking her for this service. If you discuss the general ideas
you have with a friend, write “Thanks
to Lisa Kudrow for a helpful discussion” or something of the
sort. If you borrow a specific idea from
someone, put in a footnote saying “I got this idea from Mark
Improvement” or whoever. Also
important: although I’m all in favour of talking about
philosophy assignments with others, you are
not permitted to actually write together, or to write up shared
outlines, or to share written work with
one another. Be sensible here: don’t give a photocopy of your
essay to someone else who “just
wants to get an idea” for his own paper. Conversation is good
for thought; shared written work is (in
this course) plagiarism.
Assignment 1
Read the following short passage, and then write a 1-2 page

response (12-point font, double-spaced,
normal margins, no cover page, binders, etc.). Your response
should do two things. First, identify the
argument made by the author of the passage. Once you have
isolated the argument from any
extraneous material, analyse the argument into the premises,
sub-conclusions (if any) and
conclusion. I would prefer you to do this in point form, simply
listing the premises, sub-conclusions (if
any) and conclusion. Be sure to make a very clear statement of
each point. (So, for example, do not
use the word „I‟ to refer to anyone but yourself.) Second,
evaluate the quality of the argument, giving
reasons to justify your evaluation. Write out your evaluation in
the form of a very, very short essay: a
long paragraph or two should do nicely. For purposes of
evaluation, assume the speaker is a woman
named Angela Andrews, assume that she is a member of this
section of Critical Thinking, and
assume that her audience is you, the class as a whole.
Shame
by Angela Andrews
I didn‟t have a lot of fun in grade six. My breasts started
growing before any of the other girls‟
breasts, and so the boys teased me a lot. Some of the girls
seemed very hostile too. At the time, I
didn‟t really understand how immature they were all being. I
didn‟t understand that I had every right to
be proud of my body. Instead, I felt ashamed.
People feel ashamed for all sorts of reasons. Some people are
ashamed of being fat, or of having
thick eyebrows. Other people are ashamed that they failed a

test, or dropped out of school. Some
people are even ashamed of everything about themselves,
because some parent or teacher never
let them feel good about themselves, but always criticised
everything. Probably everybody is
ashamed of one thing or another.
These days, people like Oprah Winfrey and John Bradshaw are
spreading the word that shame is
bad. They say that shame is a harmful feeling that no one should
have to feel. Maybe you expect me
to feel the same way. After all, I suffered from shame too. But I
don‟t agree at all. Instead, I think that
it is ok to make people feel shame sometimes but not other
times. There is a time and a place for
everything: why not shame? Just think of someone who eats and
eats because of pure greediness,
and who gets so fat he can‟t even fit on a single bus seat
anymore. If that person was ashamed of
himself, he might lose some weight, which might even save his
life, since there‟s the risk of heart
attacks. So a friend would be doing him a favour by asking,
“Aren‟t you ashamed of yourself?” Or
think of a woman who makes a simple fashion mistake, like
trying to wear a short dress when she
has short, thick legs. If she was a bit more easily embarrassed,
she would not go out of the house
looking bad, which is probably what she would prefer. People
should not be made to feel ashamed of
things they cannot control, of course, such as maturing early or
late, but in other cases shame is
sometimes appropriate. At least, that‟s what I think. I hope you
have found this interesting.
friends about your assignment. I

encourage you to do so. However (and this is crucial), any help
you get must be acknowledged. If
your mom reads your assignment over to check your grammar,
include a footnote or endnote
thanking her for this service. If you discuss the general ideas
you have with a friend, write “Thanks to
Lisa Kudrow for a helpful discussion” or something of the sort.
If you borrow a specific idea from
someone, put in a footnote saying “I got this idea from Mark
Improvement” or whoever. Also
important: although I‟m all in favour of talking about
philosophy assignments with others, you are
not permitted to actually write together, or to write up shared
outlines, or to share written work with
one another. Be sensible here: don‟t give a photocopy of your
essay to someone else who “just
wants to get an idea” for his own paper. Conversation is good
for thought; shared written work is (in
this course) plagiarism.

A U.S. lease-to-own chain considers whether to test its business i.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A U.S. lease-to-own chain considers whether to test its business i.docx

Similar to A U.S. lease-to-own chain considers whether to test its business i.docx (12)

More from bartholomeocoombs

More from bartholomeocoombs (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A U.S. lease-to-own chain considers whether to test its business i.docx