argument45

shenwenfei318UID: 2760391

Argument 45:
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."

The edirorial willy-nilly claims that residents of Clearview should vote to substitutu Frank Braun who is a member of the C
learview town council with Ann Green,a member of the Good Earth Coalition in the next mayoral election.To support the notion the author not only quotes an obvious increasing in the number of Clearview factories and in the number of Clearview hospital patients treated for respiratory illness but also infer that the current council members are not protecting the city’s environment and that choosing Geen can resolve the environmental problems.This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.

First of all,the argur simply assumes that last year’s enhance in the number of patients with respiratory illnesses is attributable to the worsening rnvironmental problems in the Clearview.Perhaps the number of Clearview hostipal patients treated for respiratory is especially small in fact and also when the local hospital
has treated
25
percent
more
patients
with
respiratory illnesses,the number of the patients is small either. While it might be ture that the number of the patients with respiratory illness is huge,there is no evidence which show that the environment problems due to increasing the incidence of such health problems and there are other possible explanitions such as mare effective cigarette maketing.

Similarly,the author unfairly assumes that the decisions from the city council lead to the enhancing in the number of the factories which poses
environmental
problems
for
Clearview in the author’s conclusion. To indicate these assumption,the author provides no evidence and even I concede that the council
actually
opposed
the
increase
but
lacked
adequate
authority
to
prevent
it,
perhaps the
new
factories
do
not
in
fact
harm
Clearview's
environment. Therefore I cannot
gain
any
conclusions
about
Clearview's
environment only
about
who
voters should
elect Green rather than Braun based
on
last
year's
increasing in the number of the factories or the hospital’s records.

Even assuming that the the two quoted enhacing can prove that the envionment is worsen in Clearview due to the city council’s decision.However the author give no evidence in order to point out that Braun is a factor in the city council’s decision.Without these evidences
it cannont be said that Braun do a key decision about the increasing which get the environment worsen in the last year.

Moreover even I concide that Braun is one reason for the two increases that cause the environment worsen,as mentioned in this argument there is no evindece which show that Green let alone is more effictive in resloving the environmental problems in Clearview than Braun.
The mere
fact
that
Green,
a
member
of
the
Good
Earth
Coalition,
hardly
be enough
to
prove
her willingness
and
ability
to
help
solve
Clearview's
environmental
problems,
at
least
not
without more
information
about
that
coalition
and
Green's
involvement
in it.


To sum up,the argur’s conclusion about voting suggestion is not well suppoted as it stands if he or she will not give better evidence.
To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence,such as the envioronmental problems have been worsening in Clearview and Green would be more effective in solving thses problems than Braun or any ather candidate in
this mayoral election.To better assess the problem,I would also need to know Braun was
at
least
partially
responsible
for
the
two
increases.

mynameismoUID: 2771960

这什么断行这么奇怪，LZ调整一下吧

shenwenfei318UID: 2760391

不好意思。
Argument 45:
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."

The edirorial willy-nilly claims that residents of Clearview should vote to substitutu Frank Braun who is a member of the C        learview town council with Ann Green,a member of the Good Earth Coalition in the next mayoral election.To support the notion the author not only quotes an obvious increasing in the number of Clearview factories and in the number of Clearview hospital patients treated for respiratory illness but also infer that the current council members are not protecting the city’s environment and that choosing Geen can resolve the environmental problems.This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.

First of all,the argur simply assumes that last year’s enhance in the number of patients with respiratory illnesses is attributable to the worsening rnvironmental problems in the Clearview.Perhaps the number of Clearview hostipal patients treated for respiratory is especially small in fact and also when the local hospital has treated 25  percent more patients with  respiratory illnesses,the number of the patients is small either. While it might be ture that the number of the patients with respiratory illness is huge,there is no evidence which show that the environment problems due to increasing the incidence of such health problems and there are other possible explanitions such as mare effective cigarette maketing.

Similarly,the author unfairly assumes that the decisions from the city council lead to the enhancing in the number of the factories which poses environmental problems for Clearview in the author’s conclusion. To indicate these assumption,the author provides no evidence and even I concede that the council actually opposed the increase but lacked adequate authority to prevent it, perhaps the new factories do not in fact harm Clearview's environment. Therefore I cannot gain any conclusions about Clearview's environment only about who voters should elect Green rather than Braun based on last year's increasing in the number of the factories or the hospital’s records.

Even assuming that the the two quoted enhacing can prove that the envionment is worsen in Clearview due to the city council’s decision.However the author give no evidence in order to point out that Braun is a factor in the city council’s decision.Without these evidences  it cannont be said that Braun do a key decision about the increasing which get the environment worsen in the last year.

Moreover even I concide that Braun is one reason for the two increases that cause the environment worsen,as mentioned in this argument there is no evindece which show that Green let alone is more effictive in resloving the environmental problems in Clearview than Braun. The mere fact that Green, a member of the Good Earth Coalition, hardly be enough to prove her willingness and ability to help solve Clearview's environmental problems, at least not without more information about that coalition and Green's involvement in it.

To sum up,the argur’s conclusion about voting suggestion is not well suppoted as it stands if he or she will not give better evidence. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence,such as the envioronmental problems have been worsening in Clearview and Green would be more effective in solving thses problems than Braun or any ather candidate in  this mayoral election.To better assess the problem,I would also need to know Braun was at least partially responsible for the two increases.

shenwenfei318UID: 2760391

3月5号考试了，急哦。。。