Argument 109-6月25日作业

短发mmUID: 2840480

argu
----------------------
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Maple City newspaper.
"Twenty years ago Pine City established strict laws designed to limit the number of new buildings that could be constructed in the city. Since that time the average housing prices in Pine City have increased considerably. Chestnut City, which is about the same size as Pine City, has over the past twenty years experienced an increase in average housing prices similar to Pine City, but Chestnut City never established any laws that limit new building construction. So it is clear that laws limiting new construction have no effect on average housing prices. So if Maple City were to establish strict laws that limit new building construction, these laws will have no effect on average housing prices."


This editor assert that the laws which limit new building construction will have no effect on average housing prices in Maple City (MC). To justify this recommendation the editor of MC cites the experiences of both Pine City (PC) and Chestnut City (CC). But, I find that several logical flaws made this argument unconvincing.

First, the argument depends on what might not be a true analogy between MC and PC and CC. Absent such evidence to support that the situation of CC will also take place in MC or that MC will not follow PC’ s pattern; for that matter, maybe people are more richer in CC than either in MC or PC, and the houses in CC have more functions which let people be willing to deal in a high price. Maybe the statistical dates of average housing prices in CC and MC tend to use different methods which cause the current results misleading the editor. To short, without drawing out other likely reasons, the editor can not put any sound advice to laws of limiting the number of new buildings based on that establish in MC.

Secondly, this argument fails to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between carrying out limitation on new building construction and increasing housing prices in PC. There is no direct proof show that law is the only reason to cause the increasing prices in PC. There are many factors can lead to the average housing increasing. Maybe during past two decades, many tourists came to buy the houses which drive the increasing of their average levels. Maybe during these years governments in PC devote themselves to blooming economy which trend housing prices increasing. These situations either can weaken the assertion of the editor of MC.


Thirdly, the editor does not demonstrate that PC and CC are comparable at every aspect. Maybe CC has a good surrounding to support the average housing prices increasing without law limitation while PC has an opposite situation. If so, the editor’s recommendation seems to poor advice for MC.

Finally, if consider the conclusion of PC and CC is true, without considering the time, the overall argument still lack of convincing. Maybe those conclusion are outdating and not suit for current MC. Maybe the average housing prices in PC or MC has decreased recently. Thus, this conclusion would lack any merit whatsoever.

In sum, this argument is not persuasive. To support it the editor must provide more evidence that the laws which limit new building construction will have no effect on average housing prices in MC. For example, those evidence including survey of every aspect among PC, CC and MC; proof of the situation which happened both in CC and MC or MC will follow PC’ s pattern; and so forth.

字数 460