[a习作temp] argument2 求拍 [复制链接]

pb030920
UID: 2418999

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 242
注册时间: 2007-10-27
精华: 0
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2008-2-25 22:17:45 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

2.Thefollowing appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners
from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set
of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what
colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average
property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property
values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on
landscaping and housepainting."
提纲：
1．没有证据表明规定得到执行
2．其他地区地价提高并一定由于统一外观，可能是别的原因例如房屋配套设施的改善，交通的改善
3．两地的百姓对房屋要求可能不同
In thisletter, the committee suggests that in order to raise property values inDeerhaven, a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting should beadopted as Brookville community where average property value have tripled sincethey established such restrictions seven years ago. The committee’s suggestionseems sound, however close scrutiny reveals there are some logical fallacies inhis statement.

Athreshold assumption upon which committee relies is that such restrictions onlandscaping and housepainting were implemented by local residents. However,committee fails to provide any evidences to prove it. If such restriction werenot implemented at all, there is no more ridiculous than ascribing the rise inaverage property value to these restrictions.

Even ifresidents in Brookville conformed to these restrictions, it does not amountthat these restrictions result in the increase in property value. A commonsense tells us that the price of house depends on many issues such as environmentof community, transportation in local area, public facilities and theconstruction of house. It is entirely possible that it is just coincidence thatthe property values in this community have tripled since restrictions onlandscaping and housepainting adopted. And the chief reason for property valueincreasing perhaps is that Brookville community has ameliorated publicfacilities, transportation in nearby and house construction so as to providemore convenience to local residents. Without ruling out these explanations forproperty value rising, the committee cannot make his suggestion convincing.

Finally,even though restrictions on landscaping and housepainting contribute propertyvalue increasing in Brookville, it lends little support to committee’sassumption that same restrictions will be effective in Deerhaven Acres. Thecommittee’s suggestion seems to overlook possible difference between two communitiesthat might help bring about a different result for Deerhaven. For instance, thepotential buyers of Deerhaven may pursue personality rather than uniformity. Inthat matter, it will be a disaster to adopt restrictions on exterior appearance,for it tends to decrease property values. Failing to account for thesedissimilarities makes committee’s suggestion unwarranted.

Inconclusion, the suggestion lacks credibility. To strengthen it, the committeeis ought to provide more concrete evidences to prove restrictions on exterior appearanceof house will increase property values in Deerhaven.