[a习作temp] Argument2,第一篇a习作, 求拍啊 [复制链接]

zhangx125
UID: 2352430

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 9
寄托币: 359
注册时间: 2007-6-20
精华: 0
帖子: 1

发表于 2010-4-15 14:09:53 |显示全部楼层

本帖最后由 Bela1229 于 2010-4-15 17:49 编辑

题目：
The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deer haven Acres to all homeowners in Deer haven 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 house painting."

内容：
In the letter above, the committee thought that, in order to make the property values increase, the homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should do what their counterparts of nearby Brookville community did seven years ago, as the average property values there had tripled by acting like that. At the first glance, the reasoning seemed convincing; after considering a few more aspects, some fallacies were found.

First, the committee established a fallacious causal relation that, in Brookville since seven years ago, the rising of property values was caused by yard landscaping and house painting. We can't infer a causal relation just from the timing order of two events' happening, unless all other possible reasons are considered and excluded. Perhaps, a subway line or a road was built to Brookville seven years ago, causing more and more people to swarm into the community for the convenience of traffic. With the demand of housing increasing, the price of house either for selling or for renting got higher and higher. After 7 years' inflating, the property values of Brookville's homeowners tripled in a natural way. It is also possible that the economy of Brookville area had been well developed during that seven years. As a result, the price there increased and its houses became more expensive, because the inhabitants and people working there got rich and their ability to buy rised largely. In one word, there are many other possible reasons, nothing to do with yard landscaping and house painting, for property values tripling. In addition, the letter mentioned the property values as average, and I doubt whether it rised all the time in that seven years. May the restrictions on yard landscaping and house painting which made these house not appropriate in Brookville's casual environment cause some drop in the price of houses? If so, there must be some other explanations rather than those restrictions.

Secondly, the committee committed a faulty analogy fallacy both in time scope and in geographic location. Seven years is a long time during which many aspects of our life will be changed, including opinions to something, living environment around and so on. Seven years ago might be in an period when yard landscaping and house painting were popular and people preferred houses decorated outside. Seven years later, people got tired of yard landscaping and house painting outside and they liked houses well embellished inside more, or they just wanted their houses to be simple. At that time, if someone adopted those 7 years old restrictions, I think not benefit but cost would be brought in. We can't say that what happened seven years ago must emerge nowadays. Besides, Deerhaven Acres and Brookville community nearby may do have a lot of similarities, but that doesn't mean all things are equal. If the reality is just as what the letter told us, a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted successfully made the average property values triple in Brookville, we're still not sure the same thing will happen in Deerhaven Acres. Brookville's success may be due to the art of their landscaping and painting which are created by famous artists. It is possible that not the restrictions themselves but the artwork caused the increment in property values. If so, the thought that Deerhaven Acres should adopt its own set of restrictions, mentioned in the letter, is not at the point. Again, the environment and the inhabitants' liking are important. This letter didn't tell us whether the yard landscaping and house painting would be compatible with the natural environment in Deerhaven Acres or whether people preferred the houses painted. If not, and the committee forces its homeowners to adopt the restrictions, protests will be raised and even some inhabitants will emigrate, followed by sliding down of the values of houses.

The committee's suggestion seems rational, but through a series of reasoning we find that some more details need to be considered and testified. At least, without ruling out the possibilities mentioned above, the committee can not ask the homeowners to adopt restrictions used in Brookville 7 years ago.

十分感谢！！