1-1.1 Argume184 by 6

lovelyzhouyangUID: 2766377

Based on the unfoundedevidence that the rarely borrowed books take up the unnecessary shelf space sothat it is difficulty supplying readers sufficient copies of more recent books,the author leads us to believe that the plan that books borrowed no more thanonce a year should give up space to the recent books is so wise that protestshould be ignored. It seems to be appealing when its reasoning first catchesour eyes. However, this poor logic deducing process can hardly withstand testof further reflection. It omits some concerns which make it an unreliablestatement. From logic perspectives, this argument suffers from three majorflaws.

To begin with, the times books been borrowed is not sufficient to imply thesebooks are not popular among people. The author takes it for granted the fewertimes the book are borrowed, the less important these books are. There ishighly possibility that these books are tool books such as word dictionary, lawdictionary which are indispensable for a library, though these are seldombrought out of library. What is more, it is entirely likely that these booksare used just right in the library frequently, thus they are rarely borrowed.When taking into these above and other probable situations, the plan todiminish the quantity of books rarely borrowed is not feasible.

Furthermore, even if the books seldom borrowed are really insignificant andtake up space, which sets an obstacle for more copies of recent books to pourinto the library to satisfy the demand of readers. The plan to replace thesebooks is not a good way to solve this problem. Why not enlarge the spare of thelibrary or set a new branch in somewhere else? These ways can supply thereaders sufficient copies of recent books without cutting down the number ofbooks rarely borrowed which is still in need.

Last fallacy which I feel worthy to mention is that the pretest should betreated with emphasis as the existence of protest, especially from the thirtyreveals the measure hurts certain groups of people and should be improved tobecome better accepted by wider public. If the voice of people who the libraryis aimed to serve is neglected, how can the library wish to win credit andpopularity among people in order to maintain its business? So to benefit thereaders, the library has no choice to take consideration of the protest andbrings out a more proper method to solve the problem.

To sum up, to strength the reasoning of this argument, the author should haveto provide more information to verify that books rarely borrowed is notimportant as well as that replacing these books to sufficient copies of recentbooks is of big advantage and is feasible. In addition, the protest should belaid enough importance to put forward a more considerate and thorough method.Is the factors discussed above is taken into account, the argument will be moreconvincing and logic.

总结：文章中没有发现错误的地方，evenif 的推进结构使用的也很给力，不错的文章!