Argument 107,谢谢大家了!

frenkiecjfUID: 174107

The following appeared in an editorial in the Seatown newspaper.
"Seatown has a large port exclusively for fishing boats, whose owners pay fees for the upkeep of the docks and for facilities for cleaning engines and repairing nets. In recent years, declining fish populations have decreased fishing revenue and forced many owners to stop fishing altogether. As a result, the port has a high vacancy rate and port managers are considering allowing pleasure boats, including cruise ships and other large vessels, to use the port in order to increase revenue. But allowing pleasure boats into the port would be a mistake, because the fishing boats would be forced out of the port. We should preserve the port for the fishing fleet, which, unlike pleasure boats, contributes to the prosperity of Seatown."

In this argument, the author rejects the proposal that pleasure boats should be allowed to port in the dock when there are many vacancy for these reasons: it will replace the fishing boat and it will destruct the prosperity of Seatown. What the author said seems to be reasonable at first glance, but after careful consideration, I could find it flawed.

First, no warranted evidence proves that if the pleasure boat will force the fishing boat out of the port and thus replace their position. Maybe the dock is so large that there are still many vacancy left when all the fishing boats are in the dock. From the aspect of full use of the dock, it is really a good suggestion to allow pleasure boats like cruise ships and other large vessels enter it. In a word, it is harshly to draw a conclusion that allowing pleasure boats having the access to the dock will make bad to the fishing boats.

Second, even the assumption that the access of pleasure boats to the dock will decline the number of fishing boats, it is still unwarranted to conclude that the pleasure boats will not contributes to the prosperity of Seatown. This proposal may lead the town a phenomenon: more pleasure boats are there, more tours and visitors come to it. Though the declination of fishing boats will harm the fisher's interest or even the town's profit, it may bring another bigger surprise of more opportunity and workplace. Comparing the lost and got, the advantages will prove this is a wise decision.

Third, the author only consider two results of the proposal, he/she doesn't find any other  alternative existing. According to the situation, we totally could allow the pleasure boats port in the dock during the time when the fishing boats are away and there is many vacancy there. And when the fishing boats are in need of place, he/could turn his/her priority back to the fishing boats.

In a word, the arguer made a doubtful decision without careful consideration basing on he/she adverted in the argument.

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

这位同学
请回复一下我的签名挡 那个链接
一会功夫你就扔出来10个作文 还没格式 请仔细看一下发贴要求

即使想给你改一篇 一看这样也没心情改了 :o

boyjimUID: 125249

吱吱掷地有声阿 哈哈