[a习作temp] argument164 飞跃dreams-第2次作业 [复制链接]

neomaverick
UID: 2449179

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 119
注册时间: 2008-1-20
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2008-1-30 16:06:02 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

argument164
Claitown University needs both affordable housing for its students and a way to fund the building of such housing. The best solution to this problem is to commission a famous architect known for experimental and futuristic buildings. It is common knowledge that tourists are willing to pay money to tour some of the architect's buildings, so it can be expected that tourists will want to visit this new building. The income from the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs. Furthermore, such a building will attract new students as well as donations from alumni. And even though such a building will be much larger than our current need for student housing, part of the building can be used as office space.

words:391 18:00-18:40 1.28.2008
已经过本人修改
In this argument, the author claims that in order to fund a affordable housing for its students, Claitown University needs to ask a famous architect specializing in experimental and futuristic buildings to design it. To support his claim, the author assumes that tourists would be ready to visit the building and the charged fees would cover the construction expense. However, the argument is problematic in some aspects, thus is unreliable.
To begin with, the arguer unfairly assumes that the housing building would attract enough tourist, rest only on the fact that some of the architect's designs are popular. First, perhaps many of the architect's designs are poor ones, along with a few excellent ones. So there isn't even sufficient information to conclude that the architect is a capable one. Second, even if I admit the ability of the architect, it lends scant support to indicate that tourists are to be attracted by the housing building designed by him. The author should take these factors into account before reaching the conclusion.
Secondly, there is no evidence that such a building would attract new students as well as donations from alumni. Common sense tells me that the key elements of a university is faculty quality, research facilities and budget, competitiveness of its graduators, geographical location and etc. So a nice housing building functions little in improving a University's overall performance, thus in attracting prospective students. Similarly, An alumni tends to donate his/her university for his/her appreciation for the university, rather than for the university’s perfect real estate. Unless more strong evidence are provided, the conclusion would have merits.
Last but not least, the arguer assumes that the building could be used as office space at the present time, which render the reason for the construction of housing building to doubt. It must be a costly and time-consuming project to build a architecture like this housing building so it seems to be a better idea to build a small and average housing building, from the standpoint of economy. Unless the author provides special reasons for doing what he claims, the conclusion is unwarranted.
In sum, the argument is not well reasoned thus lacks credibility. To support the conclusion, the author should provide more evidence to convince me that such a building is a must and its construction expense would be covered by whatever method.

建议以后无论写issue 还是argument，先把模板写上去，再添东西！这样写模板时会比较快，而且不会有结构的错误！

回应
0

使用道具举报

gre_killer_wu
UID: 2451830

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 168
注册时间: 2008-1-26
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2008-2-1 17:39:08 |只看该作者

In this argument, the author claims that in order to fund a affordable housing for its students, Claitown University needs to ask a famous architect specializing in experimental and futuristic buildings to design it. To support his claim, the author assumes that tourists would be ready to visit the building and the charged fees would cover the construction expense. However, the argument is problematic in some aspects, thus is unreliable.
To begin with, the arguer unfairly assumes that the housing building would attract enough tourist, rest only on the fact that some of the architect's designs are popular. First, perhaps many of the architect's designs are poor ones, along with a few excellent ones. So there isn't even sufficient information to conclude that the architect is a capable one. Second, even if I admit the ability of the architect, it lends scant support to indicate that tourists are to be attracted by the housing building designed by him. The author should take these factors into account before reaching the conclusion.
(Why it lends scant support to the conclusion? And what other reasons may account for it? Maybe you should add some detail explanations here.)
Secondly, there is no evidence that such a building would attract new students as well as donations from alumni. Common sense tells me that the key elements of a university is faculty quality, research facilities and budget, competitiveness of its graduators, geographical location and etc. So a nice housing building functions little in improving a University's overall performance, thus in attracting prospective students. Similarly, An alumni tends to donate his/her university for his/her appreciation for the university, rather than for the university’s perfect real estate. Unless more strong evidence are provided, the conclusion would have merits.
Last but not least, the arguer assumes that the building could be used as office space at the present time, which render the reason for the construction of housing building to doubt. It must be a costly and time-consuming project to build a architecture like this housing building so it seems to be a better idea to build a small and average housing building, from the standpoint of economy. Unless the author provides special reasons for doing what he claims, the conclusion is unwarranted.
In sum, the argument is not well reasoned thus lacks credibility. To support the conclusion, the author should provide more evidence to convince me that such a building is a must and its construction expense would be covered by whatever method.

只要指出作者的论述中存在的问题即可，不必在每一段的末尾都强调作者结论的荒谬。

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报

yolanda419
UID: 2420192

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 153
注册时间: 2007-10-30
精华: 0
帖子: 0

板凳

发表于 2008-2-2 21:33:17 |只看该作者

In this argument, the author claims that in order to fund a affordable housing for its students, Claitown University needs to ask a famous architect specializing in experimental and futuristic buildings to design it. To support his claim, the author assumes that tourists would be ready to visit the building and the charged fees would cover the construction expense. However, the argument is problematic in some aspects, thus is unreliable.
To begin with, the arguer unfairly assumes that the housing building would attract enough tourists, rest only on the fact that some of the architect's designs are popular. First, perhaps many of the architect's designs are poor ones, along with a few excellent ones. So there isn't even sufficient information to conclude that the architect is a capable one. Second, even if I admit the ability of the architect, it lends scant support to indicate that tourists are to be attracted by the housing building designed by him. The author should take these factors into account before reaching the conclusion.
Secondly, there is no evidence that such a building would attract new students as well as donations from alumni. Common sense tells me that the key elements of a university is faculty quality, research facilities and budget, competitiveness of its graduators, geographical location and etc. So a nice housing building functions little in improving a University's overall performance, thus in attracting prospective students. Similarly, An alumni tends to donate his/her(alumni 好像指的是男的) university for his/her appreciation for the university, rather than for the university’s perfect real estate. Unless more strong evidence are provided, the conclusion would have merits.
Last but not least, the arguer assumes that the building could be used as office space at the present time（？）, which render the reason for the construction of housing building to doubt. It must be a costly and time-consuming project to build a architecture like this housing building so it seems to be a better idea to build a small and average housing building, from the standpoint of economy. Unless the author provides special reasons for doing what he claims, the conclusion is unwarranted.
In sum, the argument is not well reasoned thus lacks credibility. To support the conclusion, the author should provide more evidence to convince me that such a building is a must and its construction expense would be covered by whatever method.
可能是我的水平有限，只看出一些小毛病。加油~~

[ 本帖最后由 yolanda419 于 2008-2-2 21:34 编辑 ]

使用道具举报