Argument216 V6站队 7.30

xiaowenzi118UID: 202887

216The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement.
'Because of its spectacular natural beauty and consistent climate, Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire. As a bonus, housing costs in Clearview have fallen significantly during the past year, and real estate taxes remain lower than those in neighboring towns. Nevertheless, Clearview's mayor promises many new programs to improve schools, streets, and public services. Retirees in Clearview can also expect excellent health care as they grow older, since the number of physicians in the area is far greater than the national average.'

In this argument, the arguer claims that Clearview should be a top choice for any one seeking a place to retire. To support this argument, the arguer lists facts about the house prices, government programs as well as number of physicians. This argument suffers from a few fallacies which render it unconvincing.

In the first place, the mere evidence of the lower house costs and estate taxes is too vague to substantiate that Clearview is a top choice for the retirees. Without the statistics of the house costs as well as the real estate taxes, it is highly possible the house costs could be still high despite of a little decrease and so are the taxes. Moreover, even if the house costs and taxes are low, the retirees might care more about the comfort of life rather than the price. In this case, the low price might lead to lower quality of life which could prevent the retirees from choosing this city as their retiring place.

Furthermore, the arguer fails to convince us that the mayor's promises could bring benefits to the retirees. It seems that the mayor's promises could bring benefits to education rather than to the retirees. Even if some public services could have some relations with the retirees, the arguer fails to inform us of the kinds of the service, which renders the benefits open to doubt. Moreover, since how soon could the promise be realized is unknown, it is quite likely that the promise is just an ideal imagination for the present and could be suspended for a long time. Unless the arguer could substantiate the benefits of the promises to the retirees, I suspend my judgment on this argument.

Finally, the number of the physicians is also scant evidence in itself to justify the so called "excellent" medical service in the city. It is quite possible that the number of the residents in this area is quite large which render a higher than average number of physicians. In that case, it is possible that the percentage of physicians could be quite low which means a poor medical service. Moreover, since higher number does not means higher quality, the claim that retirees could expect excellent health care in that city is still open to doubt.

In sum, this argument is unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer should provide further evidence including the concrete statistics of the house costs and real state taxes as well as the quality of the physicians. The arguer should also have a further investigation into the retirees to find what they really need.  

感觉是在是很糟,不论是语言还是逻辑:L 不知哪位大侠能指点一下

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-7-30 at 12:48 ]

zehuaUID: 199246

我来看看。
第一次改ARGU

zehuaUID: 199246

看完题目，我的几个想法：
1。 housing costs后是否便宜？还是原来就很贵？
2。taxes少于临镇就真的很少嘛？
3。promises能兑现嘛？
4。医生人多，可是水平呢？ 还有医生/总人口比例呢？

下面看看你的：

In this argument, the arguer claims that Clearview should be a top choice for any one seeking a place to retire. To support this argument, the arguer lists facts about the house prices, government programs as well as number of physicians. This argument suffers from a few fallacies which render it unconvincing.（开头建议看看本站队成立之初hustzwj的几个帖子，在前几页。）

In the first place, the mere evidence of the lower house costs and estate taxes is too vague to substantiate that Clearview is a top choice for the retirees. Without the statistics of the house costs as well as the real estate taxes, it is highly possible the house costs could be still high despite of a little decrease and so are the taxes. Moreover, even if the house costs and taxes are low, the retirees might care more about the comfort of life rather than the price. In this case, the low price might lead to lower quality of life which could prevent the retirees from choosing this city as their retiring place.（这里好像说的不太准。应该说低房价可能等于低档次的房子。而不是低水平的生活。另外还可以提到其他方面的开支是否极高。）

Furthermore, the arguer fails to convince us that the mayor's promises could bring benefits to the retirees. It seems that the mayor's promises could bring benefits to education rather than to the retirees. Even if some public services could have some relations with the retirees, the arguer fails to inform us of the kinds of the service, which renders the benefits open to doubt. Moreover, since how soon could the promise be realized is unknown, it is quite likely that the promise is just an ideal imagination for the present and could be suspended for a long time. Unless the arguer could substantiate the benefits of the promises to the retirees, I suspend my judgment on this argument.

Finally, the number of the physicians is also scant evidence in itself to justify the so called "excellent" medical service in the city. It is quite possible that the number of the residents in this area is quite large which render a higher than average number of physicians. In that case, it is possible that the percentage of physicians could be quite low which means a poor medical service. Moreover, since higher number does not means higher quality, the claim that retirees could expect excellent health care in that city is still open to doubt.

In sum, this argument is unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer should provide further evidence including the concrete statistics of the house costs and real state taxes as well as the quality of the physicians. The arguer should also have a further investigation into the retirees to find what they really need.  

感觉还行啊！:lol
有些废话可以去掉吧，比如Unless the arguer could substantiate the benefits of the promises to the retirees, I suspend my judgment on this argument.这种。

xiaowenzi118UID: 202887

应该不是第一次了吧,上次好像也帮我看过的!

mkb57288UID: 2105771

个人觉得Zehua的所说的那种句子要是有时间的话还是该写上，可以体现出比较强的逻辑关系，同时也可以在段尾坐一下总结