【Flyer杀G作文组】7.8 -Argument137-By happy

happy小姐UID: 2742701

ARGUMENT 137
137. The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.
"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."




提纲：主要问题—急于概括
1.Because of cleaning up Mason River, the use of the river will be likely to increase.
2.The quality of the river is not the only reason that makes the resident seldom use of the Mason River.

3.The arguer claims that quality of the river is the main reason to the seldom use of it.


In this argument, the arguer recommends that the Mason government should increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River. To justify this claim, the arguer provides the evidence that Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River because of the quality of the river. A major assumption underlying this argument is that improvement of the lands along the Mason River may improve the present condition. This line of reasoning is flawed in several aspects.
In the first place, the arguer fails to provide any evidence that the residents seldom use the Mason River for recreation are because of river pollution. To be a wonderful place for recreation, the river has to possess many qualifications besides of the clear water. Advanced implement, good service and low price all can promote the local residents to use of Mason River for recreational more often.
In the second place, even assuming that the residents seldom use of the Mason River is mainly because of river pollution, the argument fails to establish a casual relationship between improvement of the lands along the Mason River and the purification of the river. The evidences in the argument show that the river is not clean enough, but not mention the reasons of pollution. The city exists many factors may pollute the river, for example, industrial waste water and domestic swage. There is no evident show that Mason River pollution is related with the lands along the river, so the arguer recommends the government to increase the budget for the improvement the lands is not reasonable.
What further weakens the argument is survey’s validity. The only evidence in the argument is the survey that shows water sports are still the resident still favorite recreation. However, the arguer does not provide any information about the survey: how large the sample? What is structure of the sample? When was the survey conducted? Which institute is responsible for the statistics? Without above information, the survey and the recommendation based on it are not persuasive.
As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the improvement of the public lands is related with increase use of Mason River. Additionally, to solidify the argument, the arguer would have to show the survey is reliable. I would suspend my judgment about the credibility of the recommendation until the arguer can provide more evidence for the reasoning and more information concerning the survey.
昨天才看到作业，只完成了一篇，下次作业要fighting啦！