argument205 超时12分钟，求砖

azaileaUID: 187859

Argument205  

The following appeared in a recommendation from the president of Amburg's Chamber of Commerce.
'Last October the city of Belleville installed high intensity lighting in its central business district, and vandalism there declined almost immediately. The city of Amburg has recently begun police patrols on bicycles in its business district but the rate of vandalism there remains constant. Since high intensity lighting is apparently the most effective way to combat crime, we should install such lighting throughout Amburg. By reducing crime in this way, we can revitalize the declining neighborhoods in our city.'
------正文------
This argument is relatively sound, but not well-developed. While the author provides several evidences to convince us that installing high intensity lighting around the city will be profitable to reducing crime and revitalizing the declining neighborhoods, one should also wish to calculate other crucial issues before accepting his assertion.

To begin with, the fact that BC benefited greatly from the high intensity lighting in its downtown does not mean that AC will benefit similarly by emulating this successful example. Firstly, the arguer neglects that installing light equipment might not be the only means taking for deducing vandalism, but with a set of specific plans. For instance, the argument does not take into account the possibility that plenty of police took part in the patrols. And it is also likely that implementing stricter bylaw is proper to regular people’s behavior rather than spend a lot of money on the high intensity lighting. Secondly, vandalism is not as same concept as crime. Common senses tell us crime is more serious than vandalism to the extent, involving a variety of category, such as murder, plunder and even economic corruption. In either event, the analogy between AC and BC is cursory.

Moreover, it is doubted that whether the police patrols on bicycles are valid. Firstly, we are not informed when the coppers carry out patrols, maybe all in the day time when any light black out. Secondly, it is equally likely that the effect of patrols has not presented in such short time, according to 'recent' mentioned above.

Finally, the argument concludes based on a known correlation between constant crime cases and indifferent neighborhood that the latter is attributable to the former. Yet the correlation alone amounts to scant evidence of the claimed cause-and-effect relationship. Lacking such evidence, it is likely that declining neighborhoods can be caused by some others which would be equally or more effective. For instance, the tradition might be the crucial reason and the citizens in AC had been in such a cool situation since the city's foundation. Without ruling out this and other possible causes, the president’s recommendation is just a hasty generation.

All in all, the president's claim is logically unreasonable as it stands, at least base on this argument. To strengthen it, the more information sustaining the assertion should be provided. And It could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for the supposed causal relation between boosting neighborhoods and combating crime in AC. Before implementing any real actions, the Amburg's Chamber of Commerce has to properly evaluate of the city's actual situation.

ivyshoulUID: 195537

This argument is relatively sound, but not well-developed This argument is relatively well-developed, but not sound. While the author provides several evidences to convince us that installing high intensity lighting around the city will be profitable to reducing crime and revitalizing the declining neighborhoods, one should also wish to calculate other crucial issues before accepting his assertion.

To begin with, the fact that BC benefited greatly from the high intensity lighting in its downtown does not mean that AC will benefit similarly by emulating this successful example. Firstly, the arguer neglects that installing light equipment might not be the only means taking for deducing vandalism, but with a set of specific plans. For instance, the argument does not take into account the possibility that plenty of police took part in the patrols. And it is also likely that implementing stricter bylaw is proper to regular people’s behavior rather than spend a lot of money on the high intensity lighting. Secondly, vandalism is not as same concept as crime. Common senses tell us crime is more serious than vandalism to the extent, involving a variety of category, such as murder, plunder and even economic corruption. In either event, the analogy between AC and BC is cursory.

Moreover, it is doubted that whether the police patrols on bicycles are invalid. Firstly, we are not informed when the coppers carry out patrols, maybe all in the day time when any light black out. Secondly, it is equally likely that the effect of patrols has not presented in such short time, according to 'recent' mentioned above.

Finally, the argument concludes based on a known correlation between constant crime cases and indifferent neighborhood that the latter is attributable to the former. Yet the correlation alone amounts to scant evidence of the claimed cause-and-effect relationship. Lacking such evidence, it is likely that declining neighborhoods can be caused by some others which would be equally or more effective. For instance, the tradition might be the crucial reason and the citizens in AC had been in such a cool situation since the city's foundation. 什么意思啊没看明白… Without ruling out this and other possible causes, the president’s recommendation is just a hasty generation.

All in all, the president's claim is logically unreasonable as it stands, at least base on this argument. To strengthen it, the more information sustaining the assertion should be provided. And It could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for the supposed causal relation between boosting neighborhoods and combating crime in AC. Before implementing any real actions, the Amburg's Chamber of Commerce has to properly evaluate of the city's actual situation.

其实我觉得头尾不占多大的分量,关键是中间的body要丰满,fallacy最好找关键性的. 你第一次写这样不错啦,呵呵,我也写过205,不怎么样,贴出来仅供参考

ivyshoulUID: 195537

Before people in charge install high intensity lighting all over Amburg, they should think twice about the causal relationship assumed in the argument, for the evidence merely states a correlation. In addition, the author utterly omits other kinds of crimes to draw out a hasty generalization. Moreover, individual diversity of the two cities should be involved in this issue while the arguer overlooks.

Firstly, the author wrongfully takes a correlation of installing high intensity lighting and the declination of vandalism as a causal relationship only because these two things coincidentally occurred together. It is possible that Belleville applied some other policies to prevent vandalism, such as dispatch more policemen in that area, which is the true effective method. Moreover, even if lighting does have a part in preventing vandalism, what is true of Belleville is not surely the case for Amburg. Different cities have diverse conditions beside the names. For instance, what kind of people is mainly guilty of committing vandalism? Perhaps in Belleville, it is mainly teenagers afraid of being seen commit vandalism. While unashamed villains in Amburg are the main force committing vandalism to whom mere lighting is useless. In addition, a month is too short a period of time to make the conclusion that lighting will prevent vandalism. Maybe last October Belleville had a lot of rain that even villains prefer staying at home.

Moreover, even granted that adding high intensity lighting will help Amburg prevent vandalism, overall public security may not be improved. The author seems to omit the fact that crime consists of many kinds that vandalism is only a slight crime comparing to stealing, robbing, raping or killing. We’re warranted to suspect that police patrols act more positively in preventing these serious crimes than just lighting. There is no evidence that high intensity light will serve to combat other kinds of crimes save vandalism, let alone to claim it the most effective way.

Finally, even if Amburg succeed in reducing crime by the installing of lighting, will people really move in town? It depends on whether the inferior public security is the main reason of their moving out. However, the arguer fails to provide any information about this. Thus we are free to assume that maybe the bad public transportation or the declined business condition or other alternatives are the real reason. If the scenario is true, how can solely improve public security help?

To sum up, the people in charge should bear in mind other alternatives that might contribute to the absence of vandalism in Belleville last October and examine carefully the individual conditions of the two cities to make the right decision about the issue of adding high intensity lighting. Furthermore, before inspired by the optimistic prediction of the author concerning revitalize of Amburg, he/she should find out the real reason of the declination at the first place.

azaileaUID: 187859

这是第5篇啦，尽管是限时30分钟的第一篇。
For instance, the tradition might be the crucial reason and the citizens in AC had been in such a cool situation since the city's foundation. 什么意思啊没看明白…
中文意思： 可能是由于这个城市由来已久的传统观念使得邻里关系不是很融洽。
帮我看看怎么样用英语表达吧

azaileaUID: 187859

仔细读了你的文章， 我觉得是我对“declining neiborhoods”理解有误。
受打击大了