Argument204 第二篇argument

fengzhizhiUID: 2707081

TOPIC: ARGUMENT204 - The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a farming publication.

"With continuing publicity about the need for healthful diets, and with new research about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar, nationwide demand for sugar will no doubt decline. Therefore, farmers in our state should use the land on which they currently grow sugar cane to grow peanuts, a food that is rich in protein and low in sugar. Farmers in the neighboring country of Palin greatly increased their production of peanuts last year, and their total revenues from that crop were quite high."


第二篇a了，想在30分钟之内写完，没想到30分钟只写了300多字~ 这个水平10天后考。。。


提纲：
2，sugar的demand不一定会decline
3，种peanut不一定会有高回报
4，即便2，3，也不一定要该种peanut，可能种其他的会更好。


The argument’s recommendation that the farmers in the state should grow peanuts instead of sugar cane so as to gain high revenue seems reasonable. Close scrutiny, however, reveals that the evidence the arguer lists above lend little supports to the recommendation. There lacks substantial evidence to predict a decline in the demand for sugar, and the situation between the country and the neighboring country may not be the same to result a same action to a same benefit. In addition, apart from peanuts, we still have many other choices


To begin with, the author's recommendation relies on the dubious assumption that nationwide demand for sugar will decline due to a new research about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar and the continuing publicity about the need for healthy diet. However, no credible evidence is provided to show it is the case. Perhaps, it is not the habit for people in general who concern to have a healthy diet to eat an excess amount of sugar, while those who eat too much sugar is also those who do not pursue a
healthy diet and thus they will continue to eat enough sugar to meet their need. Or perhaps, it is just the propensity for people to eat sweet food regardless if it is healthful or not, just as people in particular area of the world especially fond of spicy food, which will not be easily changed. Either scenario, if true, would weaken the prediction that the demand for sugar will actually decline. Even if due to the publicity of healthful diets and the fact that too much sugar is harmful, people tend to eat less sugar than before, the argument fails to take into account the other factors that affect the demand for sugar. It is possible that due to the growth of population or the application of sugar in industries, the actual total demand is to increase. Without considering and ruling out such possibilities, it is presumptuous to make any firm prediction on this basis.


In addition, even if the neighboring country gains high revenue by increasing their production of peanuts last year, it provides no support to the conclusion that if we grow peanuts instead can also have high revenue. Firstly, high revenue for only one year cannot prove it’ll continue to make profits. Perhaps it is because the production in other part of the world is low last year due to natural disaster. Secondly, the author fails to take into consideration the difference between the two countries. Perhaps, the people of neighboring country have a preference to eat peanuts while our people actually dislike the taste of peanuts. Or perhaps, the soil of our country is not as good as the neighbor's to have a high production of peanuts.
What happens at the neighboring country may not as well apply to our country. What’s more, since the neighboring country already has increased their peanuts production, we can just import it from them while if we grow ourselves we may not earn a profit due to the competition. Under either situation, we will not have a favorable result as the neighboring country.


Finally, the arguer commits a fallacy of by imposing an either-or choice. Even if we can also gain high revenue by growing peanuts instead of sugar cane, it doesn’t means we have to grow peanuts. Perhaps other economic vegetables other than peanuts can bring us even higher revenue. Without excluding other choices available, it would be too hasty to accept the arguer’s recommendation.


In sum, the arguer’s recommendation to grow peanuts instead of the original sugar cane seems logical since people all want to make a higher income. Before we can accept the recommendation, however, the author must provide clearer evidence such as reliable survey to prove that continuing to grow sugar cane will suffer lose. To make the recommendation more convincing, the author should also verify that in fact peanuts is the best choice available.