Argument11 谢谢拍留连接回拍

指向大海UID: 158737

Argument11  第n篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：31分19秒     398 words
从2005年2月4日12时41分到2005年2月4日13时41分
------题目------
The following appeared in a memo from the mayor of the town of West Egg.
'Two years ago, our consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years. During the past two years, however, town residents have been recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Next month the amount of material recycled should further increase, since charges for garbage pickup will double. Furthermore, over ninety percent of the respondents to a recent survey said that they would do more recycling in the future. Because of our residents' strong commitment to recycling, the available space in our landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted.'
------正文------
The conclusion in this argument is that the West Egg's landfill used for garbage disposal will last for considerably longer than predicted. In support of this prediction, the arguer claims that town resident have been recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in the past. In addition, the arguer also cites that over ninety percent of the respondents to a recent survey said they would recycle more in the future. This argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

The major problem with this argument is that the evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to validate the arguer's assumption. The using speed is depended on the amount of recycling as well as the amount of garbage generation. Although recycling can slow the accumulation of garbage, the overall garbage is depended on the total amount of rubbish. If the city's garbage has increased largely in the past two years, only through the recycling can not reduce the amount of garbage in the city. Maybe the landfill will filled earlier than the prediction.

Another flaw that weakens this argument is the vague data. The aluminum and paper recycled as twice as much in previous years does not mean the other kinds of garbage is the same situation. It possible that the other metals, glasses, fiber and chemical rubbish were not recycled as much as before, thus increasing the total amount of garbage. Over ninety percent of the respondents said that they would do more recycling. But this data is vague because not all the residents in the city were engaged in the survey. And the procedure might not consider the sex, age, education level of the respondents which may influence the outcome.

In addition, the arguer ignores several other factors that might undermine the argument. The arguer claims that next month the amount of material recycling should further increase since charges for garbage pickup will double. One should not go very far to see that the amount of material recycling is decided by the character of the material rather than the pickup charges. Only when the material has a character for recycling can the material be recycled.

To sum up, the conclusion reached in this argument is valid because vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would provide more evidence that the amount of garbage is really reduced.

指向大海UID: 158737

Argument为什么拍的就那么少呢？自己顶

指向大海UID: 158737

再顶一次就不顶了