argument163 望大家极力批砖!有拍必回.谢谢

咯噔UID：2114564

Argument163  第7篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分4秒     377 words
从2005年7月26日11时12分到2005年7月26日11时30分
------题目------
The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.
'In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham.'
------正文------
In this argument the author concludes that they should build a new town hall in order to save money. To support his conclusion the author cites that the new hall can be energy-efficient and other parts of the hall can be rent out generate income. However, all these evidence reveals several critical problems which altogether serve to undermine the author's conclusion

First,the author fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact that the cost of energy to cool or warm the hall , or the fact of difficulty to accommodate all people, with the need of a new town hall. The observed phenomenon, in itself, says little about that. Consider, for example, it may because the price of electricity is too high in this town that the cost on energy remains high in winter and summer. It may also due to people's waste. For example, workers there turn on the air conditioner even when there is no need. Or maybe there are too many people work there, far beyond the need of government.Since all the reasons are possible, I can't accept the author's specious causal relationship.

Second, granted that the cost is due to energy efficiecy, there is no evidence that some of the space in the new building can be rented out. Consider, if the rent is too high for the firms or other unities to afford. Or perhaps the place is too far to downtown and the material place. It is also possible that the old hall town can bring about more income by attracting many tourists coming.

Third, even assuming all the foregoing assumptions are substantiated, the conclusion may still remain misleading. First, the evidence that this new house will save money is absent. Consider the expense to build the new hall which may equal to years of the energy cost of the old hall. Second, to save money, there are some other considerable methods, such as improving the old equipments, which can also achieve what was due to the given solution.

In sum, the conclusion is not well founded.Before I accept this argument, the author needs to provide the evidence about (1)the high cost is due to energy inefficiency,(2)other parts of the new hall can be rent out, and(3)this is the most effective way to reduce cost.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-27 at 21:55 ]

childrenqUID：2109575

In this argument the author concludes that they should build a new town hall in order to save money. To support his conclusion the author cites that the new hall can be energy-efficient and other parts of the hall can be rent out (to) generate income. However, all these evidence不可数 reveals several critical problems which altogether serve to undermine the author's conclusion.

First, the author fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact that the cost of energy to cool or warm the hall , or the fact of difficulty to accommodate all people, with (换and, 前面有between) the need of a new town hall. The observed phenomenon, in itself, says little about that. Consider, for example, it may because the price of electricity is too high in this town that the cost on energy remains high in winter and summer. It may also due to people's waste. For example, workers there turn on the air conditioner even when there is no need.(改成, It is also possible that employees keep the air conditioners on even when they are not in the offices.) Or maybe there are too many people work there, far beyond the need of government. Since all the reasons (situations) are possible, I can't accept the author's specious causal relationship.

Second, (even) granted that the cost is due to energy efficiency, there is no evidence that some of the space in the new building can be rented out. Consider, if the rent is too high for the firms or other unities (corporations) to afford.if之后呢?怎么就没了? Or perhaps the place is too far to (from) downtown and the material place 指的是什么?. It is also possible that the old hall town can bring about more income by attracting many tourists coming去掉.

Third, even assuming这个说法感觉不对劲 all the foregoing assumptions are substantiated既然假设,就不能假设为已证明是对的,应该是true, the conclusion may still remain misleading. First, the evidence that this new house will save money is absent. Consider the expense to build the new hall which may equal to years of the energy cost of the old hall. Second, to save money, there are some other considerable methods, such as improving the old equipments, which can also achieve what was due to the given solution.没看懂最后这句

In sum, the conclusion is not well founded. Before I accept this argument, the author needs to provide the evidence about (1)the high cost is due to energy inefficiency,(2)other parts of the new hall can be rent out, and(3)this is the most effective way to reduce cost.

几个问题:
看了我推荐给你的帖子没? 以后开头结尾就不要这样写啦
论证不够深入,not strongly support你的观点
句子感觉不顺畅,sometimes句式简单以及重复