第一遍Argument，恳求意见

qqlddUID: 2594915

简要提纲：

********************
A. 空气污染水平增加没能代表 the current members are not protecting our environment.
B. 没有论据证明 respiratory illness 是由于 air pollution 引起的
C. 没有证明G能保护环境
********************

1. 
   
2. TOPIC: ARGUMENT7 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.
   
3. 
   
4. "In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."
   
5. WORDS: 442          TIME: 01:13:13          DATE: 2009/8/27 18:43:40
   
6. 
   
7. The author suggests that residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green to protect the environment of the city. To support his suggestion, the author cites the fact that the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increase and there are more patients with respiratory illnesses has been treated in the local hospital during the last year. Although the argument seems reasonable, it is actually logically flawed in several aspects.
   
8. 
   
9. First of all, the author unfairly supposes that the current members are not protecting their environment due to the incensement of air pollution levels. However, the air pollution may be the nationwide problem. The current members may take some measures to protect the environment. But, cities near Clearview may have a heavy air pollution and effect Clearview. Furthermore, the fact that air pollution levels have increased during the past year doesn't indicate that air pollution levels had increased during the earlier years. In short, the author couldn't hastily conclude that the current government does not make efforts to protect the environment.
   
10. 
    
11. Secondly, the fact that 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses have been treated in the local hospital may not due to the increment of air pollution. Maybe the salary of the citizens have raised this year, so they have more money to the hospital to treat respiratory illnesses which they didn't think that it is a serious illness in the early years. What's more, the local hospital may become famous with respiratory illnesses during the past year. Therefore, many people from other cities will come to the hospital of Clearview to treat respiratory illnesses. If the author couldn't give sufficient evidence to prove that real number of local residents with respiratory illnesses, the argument that more residents have respiratory illnesses due to the air pollution is dubious.
    
12. 
    
13. Finally, the author unfairly assumes that Ann Green will solve the environmental problems if she or he has been elected. No evidence shows that new mayor is better than current mayor in environmental protection. Even worse, new mayor may do much worse not only in environmental protection but also in other fields. Without enough information about Ann Green, it's open to doubt the electing of Ann Green is necessary.
    
14. 
    
15. In conclusion, it's would be necessary for the author to rule out above-mentioned possibilities before we could better evaluate the conclusion. To strengthen the author's conclusion, he should provide more evidence to prove the air pollution is heavy enough and more local residents suffer from respiratory illnesses. Moreover, to better assess the author's conclusion, the author should also give sufficient evidence to prove Ann Green is better than Frank Braun.

复制代码

9.11就考了，才写一遍A，和60个A提纲，闷啊……

qqlddUID: 2594915

没人，自己顶……

manfred_huiUID: 2689901

我也是新手，今天刚注册，简单改了一下，希望对你有用
----------

TOPIC: ARGUMENT7 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.



"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

WORDS: 442          TIME: 01:13:13          DATE: 2009/8/27 18:43:40



The author suggests that residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green to protect the environment of the city. To support his suggestion, the author cites the fact that the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased and there are more patients with respiratory illnesses has been treated in the local hospital during the last year. Although the argument seems reasonable, it is actually logically flawed in several aspects.



First of all, the author unfairly supposes that the current members are not protecting their environment due to the incensement (这个词可以这样用吗？不知道改成aggravated air pollution会不会更简洁一点) of air pollution levels. However, the air pollution may be the nationwide problem. The current members may already take some measures to protect the environment. But, cities near Clearview may have a heavy air pollution and effect Clearview. Furthermore, the fact that air pollution levels have increased during the past year doesn't indicate that air pollution levels had increased during the earlier years （这个例子不太好吧，不管怎样那去年一年空气质量还是恶化了，我觉得不如说可能Frank是积极要求保护环境的，但大多数其他议员不同意，那么环保方案仍无法通过）. In short, the author couldn't hastily conclude that the current government does not make efforts to protect the environment.



Secondly, the fact that 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses have been treated in the local hospital may not due to the increment of air pollution. Maybe the salary of the citizens have raised this year, so they have more money to the hospital to treat respiratory illnesses which they didn't think that it is a serious illness in the early years （这个例子有点勉强，一般小病（not serious）也不会花很多钱，所以可以考虑一下其他理由，如there are many other factors may lead to respiratory illnesses. ）. What's more, the local hospital may become famous with respiratory illnesses during the past year. Therefore, many people from other cities will come to the hospital of Clearview to treat respiratory illnesses. If the author couldn't give sufficient evidence to prove that real number of local residents with respiratory illnesses, the argument that more residents have respiratory illnesses due to the air pollution is dubious.



Finally, the author unfairly assumes that Ann Green will solve the environmental problems if she or he has been elected. No evidence shows that new mayor is better than current mayor in environmental protection. Even worse, new mayor may do much worse not only in environmental protection (Ann来自Good Earth Coalition，所以不太会做不好环保问题吧) but also in other fields（这里倒是可以展开一点，比如Good Earth Coalition处理的问题比较单一，而市长还要兼顾经济的发展，这里还可以做一些对比，因为Frank会比Ann更有处理复杂事务的经验）. Without enough information about Ann Green, it's open to doubt the electing of Ann Green is necessary.  



如果时间允许，可以再加一段，简单说一下，作者没有考虑到其他候选者可能比这两位都好。


In conclusion, it's would be necessary for the author to rule out above-mentioned possibilities before we could better evaluate the conclusion. To strengthen the author's conclusion, he should provide more evidence to prove the air pollution is heavy enough and more local residents suffer from respiratory illnesses. Moreover, to better assess the author's conclusion, the author should also give sufficient evidence to prove Ann Green is better than Frank Braun.


如果有空的话，也帮我改一下吧

链接如下

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1001282-1-1.html