【clover】Argument2 习作 by 小g

gc1030255UID: 2550033

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 470
TIME: 00:45:52
DATE: 2010-2-4 11:00:00



In the letter above, the committee concludes that in order to enhance Deerhaven Acres property values homeowners should accept certain restrictions on their home's exterior appearance. To justify this conclusion, the arguer provides the evidence that in the seven years since the nearby Brookville followed the similar restrictions their property values have increased. However, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions which render it unconvincing as it stands.

The author's threshold assumption is based on the restrictions were implemented by the Brookville homeowners in the first place. However, no clear evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. Without the implementation of the restrictions, any change in Brookville's property values could be attributed to the increase. Accordingly, the committee cannot draw any firm conclusion that the similar restrictions would be applicable to Deerhaven Acres.

Even if the Brookville homeowners implemented these restrictions, the arguer fails to take into account a myriad of other factors that might also lead to the property values' increase. Property values is a function of both supply and demand. It is entirely possible that the supply of housing has decreased because of the development of economy and industry. Or perhaps the demand of housing has rised up due to an influx of major employers. Or perhaps the improvements of housing inside facilities as well as the outside surroundings have attracted people's attention. Without considering and ruling out these and other factors, the author cannot justifiably conclude that the increase in property values is owing to restrictions.

Even assuming that Brookville's rising property values is attributable to the implementation of the restrictions, the argument is based on an incomplete comparison and is wholly unpersuasive by this analogy. The author simply assumes that Deerhaven Acres should follow Brookville's restrictions to raise property values, but he does not provide any evidence that is indeed comparable. As we know, the two situations are not similar enough to justify the analogical deduction. For instance, potential Deerhaven Acres house buyers might be less concern about home's exterior appearance than Brookville homeowners. For that matter, perhaps Deerhaven Acres house buyers would feel bored on the same house exterior appearance, under these conditions, adopting these restrictions might actually tend to diminish property values. In short, lacking evidence that conditions on the two are relevantly similar, the author cannot convince me on the basis of Brookville's experience that the proposed course of action would be effective in increasing Deerhaven Acres's property values.

In sum, to persuade me that Deerhaven Acres should adopt the proposed restrictions the committee must provide clear evidence that the implementation of restriction in Brookville, and not other factors, was responsible for the increase in Brookville's property values. Meanwhile, the committee must supply objective evidence that other factors affecting house price vales in these two areas are exactly the same.

gc1030255UID: 2550033

月月辛苦了~

mintshUID: 2460474

~~可能因为是第二稿了~~感觉不太指得出错误了~~呵呵