Argument4 我的第一篇，欢迎拍砖

alphaUID: 186282

Argument4]The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.
'Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams.'

In this argument,the speaker concludes that you should use Adams as your estate firm
if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price.To justify this conclusion
the speaker points out that Adams 40 real estate agents compared with that Fitch has
25,many of whom work only part time.To further justify his conclusion,the speaker also
cites the fact that Adam's revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch,and
included home sales that averaged $168,000,compared to Fitch's $144,000.In addition,
the speaker refered to that homes listed with Adams sell faster as well.However,the
speaker's argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions,and is therefore
unpersuasive as it stands.

First of all,the speaker fails to establish causal relationship between good estate
firms and good price and quick speed of selling a home.In fact,good estate firms can't
guarantee good price and quick speed of selling a home.The essential quality of the
home is much more important.If the home to be selled is very bad,the best estate firm
can't sell it for a high price and a quick speed as well.On the other hand,if the
home to be selled is a very good home,an ordinary estate firm can also sell it for
a high price and a quick speed.

Secondly,the evidences provided in this argument are not sufficient to validate the
assumption that of the two leading real eatate firms Adams is clearly superior.First,
the fact that Adams has more estate agents does not necessarily imply that Adams is
superior.There is a possibility that though Adams has more estate agents,the work
efficiency of Adams is much more worse than that of Fitch.Second,the fact that Adam's
revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch,included home sales that averaged
$168,000,compared to Fitch's $144,000,lends no strong support to that Adams is superior.
It is probable that of the selled homes Adams is mainly good homes while Fitch is mainly
bad homes.In this case,the comparison between Adams and Fitch is meaningless.Third,the
speaker cited a fact that homes listed with Adams selled faster than those listed with
Fitch ten years ago.However,there may be huge variation between Adams and Fitch.It is
possible that the cases of ten years ago and today are just reverse.

All in all,the speaker's argument can't be taken seriously as it stands.To strengthen
it the speaker must demonstrate that the work efficiency of Adams is better than that
of Fitch.Finally,to better assess the argument I would need more information about
the situation of the two estate firms of today rather than that of ten years ago.

chenxgUID: 183868

我觉得应该把第二段的内容进行展开，总是觉得论述的不够充分。而第一段的内容似乎应该放在文章的后面，甚至可以作为总结段。
个人认为argument的写作就是真对各个论据逐一进行突破，然后在总体上的错误进行指正。
不过你指出的各个论据的错误我基本上还都是同意的。
个人意见，仅供参考。

静静发呆UID: 194347

好巧啊
我也刚刚写了这个
看了你的觉得自己的太差了
555还有10几天，该努力了

alphaUID: 186282

最初由 chenxg 发布
[B]我觉得应该把第二段的内容进行展开，总是觉得论述的不够充分。而第一段的内容似乎应该放在文章的后面，甚至可以作为总结段。
个人认为argument的写作就是真对各个论据逐一..

以下省略...... [/B]

我也非常想把第二段进行展开，可是老觉得没什么好写了。谢谢这位兄台！

kimi1984UID: 195922

觉得开头段引用的过多了，可以自己概括一下。
全篇感觉论述的还算比较清楚，但没有什么出彩的地方，词语不够丰富，很多重复的词啊，思路不错，感觉想是限时写的吧，第一篇很不错了。
我个人觉得argument几乎不给你考虑的时间，30分钟实在照顾不到那么多，比如用词，句子结构多变，多加串联词等等。还是平时的积累啊