Argument164 大学请建筑师修新楼 一定回拍 谢谢

rodgoodUID: 2619326

TOPIC: ARGUMENT164 - Claitown University needs both affordable housing for its students and a way to fund the building of such housing. The best solution to this problem is to commission a famous architect known for experimental and futuristic buildings. It is common knowledge that tourists are willing to pay money to tour some of the architect's buildings, so it can be expected that tourists will want to visit this new building. The income from the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs. Furthermore, such a building will attract new students as well as donations from alumni. And even though such a building will be much larger than our current need for student housing, part of the building can be used as office space.


In this article, the writer suggests that Claitown University(CU) should commission a famous architect specified in experimental and futuristic buildings to solve the problem of affordable housing for students and funding the building. To bolster his conclusion, an expectation was made that the costs of the new building will be covered by fees from tourists, and the building can attract new students and donations from alumni. At first glance, the conclusion may be plausible, but close scrutiny reveals that the expectations in the argument are groundless, which undermine the conclusion actually.

To begin with, providing no detail about the project, including the budget of the building and any survey of the tourist market, the writer cannot expect that the costs of the building will be covered by fees from tourists. On one hand, the expenditure of the building is probably much higher than anticipation. As mentioned in the argument, the building is used not only of students' housing, but also for tourism, so it must be utility as well as majestic, leading to a high cost accordingly. And the salary for famous architect, who will design the attractive building, has to be taken into account. On the other hand, the situation of the tourist market has not been investigated. Do people want to take a visit to student dormitory in a university? No one knows. Even though the building is designed by a famous architect, does the writer make sure that visitors still come for charge? Unfortunately, he doesn’t. Therefore, the lack of budget and information about tourism market renders the conclusion unconvincing.

Secondly, even granted the project is practical, the influence to the ordinary life in the campus from tourism should not be ignored. Universities are places for study and research, a paradise for people curious to knowledge. However, as the number of visitors increases, the campus would be more crowed
and noisy than ever before, and the environment would be polluted with littering, which would disturb students and teachers' life and study. What's more, as the campus becomes crowded, the safety of students and faculties as well as property in CU cannot be guaranteed. If true, the plan of tourism will probably be blocked by students and faculties, let alone the money from it.

Thirdly, there is no evidence to prove that the new students and alumni will be attracted to the new building, making the conclusion unpersuasive as it stands. Considering which university or college to choose, students always refer to the power of the field they are interested in and the teaching quality of a university or college, while paying little attention on magnificent buildings. They would not long to study in a school only for its buildings. In addition, alumni endow money to their mother university because of their deep thanks to her cultivation; however, it is quite impossible that they will offer donations only for a new building. From this analysis, the conclusion is out of support from this point of view.

In sum, the arguer commits some fallacies in expectation and neglects the problems the project may bring about. He should launch several investigations about the tourism and thoughts among students and teachers towards the plan. Only when all aspects of the problem are solved can the conclusion be obtained.

紫陌纤尘o0UID: 2745492

已修改，希望LZ可以给我反馈意见，共同讨论，共同进步~

dayanxiayehUID: 2758697

改啦，望回拍 https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1058761-1-1.html
对了，你为什么选这篇ar啊，频率很低啊，再帮你传一个机经排行把

dayanxiayehUID: 2758697

对了，还看了小紫童鞋改的，感觉相当牛逼，不过是改完才看的

紫陌纤尘o0UID: 2745492

4# dayanxiayeh 小紫是指我么？欢迎指教噢~

dayanxiayehUID: 2758697

5# 紫陌纤尘o0 呵呵，就是你呀，居然还找到两条线索，要是我也指定是一件事一件事的说啦，根本不会考虑什么线索不线索啦

紫陌纤尘o0UID: 2745492

6# dayanxiayeh
我感觉啦，每个个阿狗都是有一条线给串起来的，最好把逻辑链拉出来，然后在每一节的连接处各个击破，这样就清晰多了，呵呵~
话说，刚才偶们组长留作业了，让5天之内搞定所有阿狗分析，55555~愁~~
童鞋何时考试啊？偶在妇女节考嘞~

dayanxiayehUID: 2758697

7# 紫陌纤尘o0 有个组督促还是好的，我散兵一个，2月23准备挨刀，加油啊

rodgoodUID: 2619326

改啦，望回拍 https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1058761-1-1.html
对了，你为什么选这篇ar啊，频率很低啊，再帮你传一个机经排行把
dayanxiayeh 发表于 2010-2-7 21:08

谢谢~~主要是训练个思路哈，argument考场没有选择，随机性比较大哈~~

rodgoodUID: 2619326

根据上面两位童鞋的建议，我对这篇习作作了删减和如下修改。非常谢谢他们~~

In this article, the writer suggests that Claitown University(CU) should commission a famous architect specialized（之前这里的specified估计是用错了，呵呵） in experimental and futuristic buildings to solve the problem of affordable housing for students and funding the building. To bolster his conclusion, an expectation was made that the costs of the new building will be covered by fees from tourists, and the building can attract new students and donations from alumni. At first glance, the conclusion may be plausible, but close scrutiny reveals that the expectations in the argument are groundless, which undermine the conclusion actually.

To begin with, providing no detail about the project, including the budget of the building and any survey of the tourist market, the writer cannot expect that the costs of the building will be covered by fees from tourists. On one hand, the expenditure of the building is probably much higher than anticipation. The building is used not only for students' housing, but also for tourism, so it must be utility as well as artistically valuable, leading to a high cost accordingly. And the salary for famous architect, who will design the attractive building, has to be taken into account. On the other hand, the situation of the tourist market has not been investigated. Do people want to take a visit to student dormitory in a university, even though designed by a famous architect? No one knows because, as mentioned in the article, they are will to visit some of the architect’s buildings, not all of them. Therefore, the lack of details like budget and information about tourism market renders the conclusion unconvincing.

Secondly, there is no evidence to prove that the new students will come to CU because of the new building, making the conclusion unpersuasive as it stands. Considering which university or college to choose, students always refer to the power of the field they are interested in and the teaching quality of a university or college, while paying little attention on magnificent buildings. What’s more, as the number of visitors increases, the campus may be more crowed
and noisy than ever before, which would disturb students' life and study. The safety of students and property cannot be guaranteed. Therefore, we cannot make sure that whether the new building is a positive force to attract new student to come.

In addition, the donations from alumni are uncertain either. Common sense informs us that alumni endow money to their alma mater because of their deep thanks to her cultivation; however, they are less likely to offer donations only for a new building used as student dormitory, which they are unfamiliar with and probably breaks their impression of the old campus. As a consequence, the conclusion is unsupported from this point of view.

In sum, the arguer commits some fallacies in expectation and neglects the problems the project may bring about. He should launch several investigations about the tourism and thoughts among students and teachers towards the plan. Only when all aspects of the problem are solved can the conclusion be obtained.

落雪飞花2008UID: 2579536

In this article, the writer suggests that Claitown University(CU) should commission a famous architect specialized（之前这里的specified估计是用错了，呵呵）
in experimental and futuristic buildings to solve the problem of affordable housing for students and funding the building. To bolster好词，呵呵GRE词汇 his conclusion, an expectation was made that the costs of the new building will be covered by fees from tourists, and the building can attract new students and donations from alumni. At first glance, the conclusion may be plausible, but close scrutiny reveals that the expectations in the argument are groundless, which undermine the conclusion actually.
To begin with, providing no details about the project, including the budget of the building and any survey of the tourist market, the writer cannot expect that the costs of the building will be covered by fees from tourists. On one hand, the expenditure of the building is probably much higher than anticipation. The building is used not only for students' housing, but also for tourism, so it must be utility as well as artistically valuable, leading to a high cost accordingly. And the salary for famous architect, who will design the attractive building, has to be taken into account.感觉这边过度的有些突兀，虽然作者在前面已经先说明花费可能会比预期高的观点，但是作者在充分论证后在拉回论点比较好，比如说，Thus,blabla On the other hand, the situation of the tourist market has not been investigated. Do people want to take a visit to student dormitory in a university, even though designed by a famous architect? No one knows because, as mentioned in the article, they are will to visit some of the architect’s buildings, not all of them.
Therefore, the lack of details like
budget and information about tourism market renders the conclusion unconvincing. 奥，作者是在最后综述的，但是个人建议还是两方面分开比较有逻辑性。
Secondly, there is no evidence to prove that the new students will
come to CU because of the new building, making the conclusion unpersuasive as it stands. Considering which university or college to choose, students always refer to the power of the field they are interested in and the teaching quality of a university or college, while paying little attention on magnificent buildings.这句有点太霸道了，不如换成宿舍条件只是学生考虑的众多因素之一。 What’s more, as the number of visitors increases, the campus may be more crowed
and noisy than ever before, which would disturb students' life and study. The safety of students and property cannot be guaranteed. Therefore, we cannot make sure that whether the new building is a positive force to attract new student to come.整体论述很好，有点层层递进的感觉，有杀伤力。
In addition, the donations from alumni are uncertain either. Common sense informs us that alumni endow money to their alma mater because of their deep thanks to her cultivation; however, they are less likely to
offer donations only for a new building
used as student dormitory, which they are unfamiliar with and probably breaks their impression of the old campus. As a consequence, the conclusion is unsupported from this point of view.感觉这段论述再深一点比较好，楼主只是指出了，校友捐助母校只是因为对母校的感激，所以不会因为一个建筑而送钱。如果在深入一点说，捐助母校是因为对自己的培养，所以他们更愿意看到母校把钱花在培养学生的能力等方面，而不是奢侈的花钱在一个宿舍楼上。或许这会给校友们铺张浪费的印象。····
In sum, the arguer commits some fallacies in expectation and neglects the problems the project may bring about. He should launch several investigations about the tourism and thoughts among students and teachers towards the plan. Only when all aspects of the problem are solved can the conclusion be obtained.
楼主的攻击点基本都很全面了，行文也很赞，就在论证上有的地方稍有牵强，很好的文章，学习啦。前几天不能上网，所以没有及时回拍，不好意思。还请原谅。
10# rodgood