argument2 G89 18号作业 临考了，就这几篇了，看看吧.

vickycy6UID：2107893

Argument2  

The following 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.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer advocates that all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in order to raise property values in there. To support his argument, he states that seven years ago, the nearby Brookville community due to the adoption of a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be paint, now their average property values have tripled. However, this argument suffers from serious fallacies in reasoning though it sounds good.

The main problem of this argument is that there is no direct evidence show that the increase of property value in Brookville community is the result of the adoption of a set of restrictions. It is just the speculation of the arguer himself, therefore weaken the evidence seriously. No further information about the condition of other aspects in Brookville. It is possible that due to the fact that the environment there was greatly improved, or that much more facilities which benefit the citizen built in the community. Without render the causal and effect relationship between the restrictions adopt by homeowners there and the increase of property value, the evidence is not persuasive it sounds.

Another point worth considering is that the argument is based on the false analogy. Although the Brookville community and the Deerhaven Acres are neighboring, there is no evidence show that such two different places are of the same condition. It is very likely that people in Deerhaven Acres pursuing individualism, thus they don't like a uniform color. In such case, if they adopt a set of restrictions on the color, the homeowners may move out. Even if people in Deerhaven accept the restriction, there may be no different change in the property value for there is hardly evidence indicate that the policy used in Brookville will be effective to the Deerhaven. Additionally, it was seven years that the Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions, and now people may not fond of that old measure. Thus the results may also not achieve what the arguer desires.

In sum, the argument is based on false logic and should be rejected. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide more evidence indicate that the increase of property value in Brookville have the correlation with the adoption of restrictions. And furthermore, the arguer needs to render us the possibility that the restrictions will also apply to the Deerhaven Acres.

huangdaoUID：190018

The following 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.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer advocates that all 题目没有说吧 homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in order to raise property values in there. To support his argument, he states that seven years ago, the nearby Brookville community due to the adoption of a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be paint, now their average property values have tripled. However, this argument suffers from serious fallacies in reasoning though it sounds good.

The main problem of this argument is that there is no direct evidence show that the increase of property value in Brookville community is the result of the adoption of a set of restrictions. It is just the speculation of the arguer himself, therefore weaken the evidence seriously. No further information about the condition of other aspects in Brookville. It is possible that due to the fact that the environment there was greatly improved, or that much more facilities which benefit the citizen built in the community.句子结构有问题 Without render the causal and effect relationship between the restrictions adopted by homeowners there and the increase of property value, the evidence is not persuasive it sounds.

Another point worth considering is that the argument is based on the false analogy？？要么不要the 要么就说出内容吧 . Although the Brookville community and the Deerhaven Acres are neighboring, there is no evidence show that such two different places are of the same condition. It is very likely that people in Deerhaven Acres pursuing individualism, thus they don't like a uniform color. In such case, if they adopt a set of restrictions on the color, the homeowners may move out. Even if people in Deerhaven accept the restriction, there may be no different change in the property value for there is hardly evidence indicate that the policy used in Brookville will be effective to the Deerhaven. Additionally, it was seven years that the Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions, and now people may not fond of that old measure.是不是论证得单薄了一点 Thus the results may also not achieve what the arguer desires.

In sum, the argument is based on false logic and should be rejected. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide more evidence indicate that the increase of property value in Brookville have the correlation with the adoption of restrictions. And furthermore, the arguer needs to render us the possibility that the restrictions will also apply to the Deerhaven Acres.

感觉很不错了 加油

[ Last edited by huangdao on 2005-8-19 at 12:14 ]

vickycy6UID：2107893

谢谢啊!