[未归类] Argument190 [OB小组]第48次作业_pesticide [复制链接]

pesticide
UID：2359145

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 520
注册时间: 2007-7-6
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-9-3 18:40:01 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Argument190 [OB小组]第48次作业_pesticide

Based on a series of reasoning from the fact of declined tickets sale, the arguer concluded in the end that the advance ticket purchases and attendance at the concerts will be improved by featuring more modern music, especially works of Richerts. However, the process of the reasoning suffers from several fallacies, thus is unconvincing.

To begin with, the arguer made a hasty inference that the declined number of people who purchased tickets results from the lack of community support. Yet there is no evidence to support it. It is entirely possible that the decreased sale of tickets resulted from other factors. Perhaps the economic situation of Glenville is less favorable than before. Being afraid of their living, people would reduce their frequency to go to theatre; or perhaps the price of tickets is rocketing so that few people can afford it. Failing to consider these possibilities, the link between declined sales of tickets and community support can not be established.

Second, even if the declined support resulted in the drop of tickets sale, the further reasoning that it is the choice of music which brings about the decline is unreasonable. The assumption the arguer relied on is that there are only two mutually exclusive factors attributed to the fall of tickets sale. But this is not necessarily the case in reality. Perhaps the reduced support from local residents had nothing to do with the music itself; other factors such as the setting of the theatre, a novel emerged entertainment form and so on play an important role in the results. If the setting of the theatre is out of date and uncomfortable, even if the music is appealing, no doubt less people will attend to such theatre. Or a new entertainment is emerging and rapidly popular, people will be less inclined to go to concert. Without ruling out other factors such as above, the reasoning is ramshackle.

Finally, even if the choice of music greatly influences the popularity of concerts, there is no justification provided by the arguer to support his or her corresponding measures. No evidence can be found in the article that people will prefer the modern music. In case the local people prefer to the classic music rather than the modern music, it is obvious that the alteration of music will cause the opposite results—the further decline of tickets sale. Moreover, that the local residents purchase Richerts’ recording more often than any other contemporary recordings does not necessarily indicate that they would like to attend the concert for the same recording. Perhaps due to having listened too much Richerts’ music, people are bore with them and want to try some kinds of novel music forms. Hence, the measures proposed by the arguer are not guaranteed.