argument239 从昨天开始流行的题目~

so猫UID: 148633

Argument239  第1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：30分3秒     539 words
从2005年2月18日14时38分到2005年2月18日15时30分
------题目------
The following appeared as an editorial in the local newspaper of Dalton.
'When the neighboring town of Williamsville adopted a curfew four months ago that made it illegal for persons under the age of 18 to loiter or idle in public places after 10 p.m., youth crime in Williamsville dropped by 27 percent during curfew hours. In Williamsville's town square, the area where its citizens were once most outraged at the high crime rate, not a single crime has been reported since the curfew was introduced. Therefore, to help reduce its own rising crime rate, the town of Dalton should adopt the same kind of curfew. A curfew that keeps young people at home late at night will surely control juvenile delinquency and protect minors from becoming victims of crime.'
------正文------
The argument is well-organized, but poorly-reasoned. There are several facets above are problematic. First of all, the argument makes false analogy between the towns of Williamsville and Dalton. In addition, the argument assumes a correlation that accounts for the cause-and-effect relationship. In the end, the speaker above arbitrarily draw the conclusion regardless of other factors that may influence the high rate of the juvenile delinquency and crimes. I will discuss them one by one in the following paragraphs.

In envaluating the possibility of the utilization of the measurements taken in Williamsville, the arguer needs to prove evidence that there are several similiarity, both in social customs and environmental factors. It may be possible that the youth in Dalton prefer to commit crime in the daytime rather than in nights. Thus the curfew is of no use in Dalton while it may prove to be effective in Williamsville. Also it may be the case that the juvenile have inclination to do robbery or to break facilities not in public places, but the places where are comparatively quiet and of few people. Again the restriction of the remaining till night in the public places have nothing to do with it. Thus the speaker has to offer detailed information upon the habits of the youth in Dalton and the usual measurement by which they commit their crimes.

Even if there are suffient evidence shown that the Williamvelle and Dalton are similiar in many aspects, the curfew cannot be used without the further investigation upon the authenticity and reliability of the effectiveness of the curfew. Although it seems the argument has offered abundant statistics above to prove the effectiveness of the action of curfew, no analysis based on the data was given to show that the correlation between curfew and decrease in youth crime. The merely thing that the speaker refers is the time sequence of the curfew and the decrease. However, it cannot convince me that these two things have inference relationships-- let alone the causal relationship. The speaker overlook many other factors that may contribute the decreas in crimes, such as the climate influence-- it is well known that generally speaking the crime rate in winter is much less than that of summer. From this point of view, the speaker merely imagine an unexisting link between two separate factors.

Granted that both assumptions in the above two passages are true, the arbitrary conclusion is still open to doubt. Taken the curfew measurement, as the speaker supposed, can the crime rate decrease effectively in Dalton thus decrease the number of the victims of crime? Since the restriction upon the activities of the youth may raise complanation and may even lead to repellation to greater extent, it is hard to promise that the juvenile would obey the rules in silence. More violent crimes would be made out of hatred and dissatisfaction. Meanwhile, given that the juvenille are compliant to obey the curfews, no evidence are offered to promise their protection from the crimes. As we know, often the youth are innocent when getting involved in crime and becoming victims without knowing what happens.

In conclusion, the argument, although seems to be sound at the first glance, commits several logical fallacies. The speaker should offer more details about the situation in the two towns, then to compare the similiarity between the two. Also evidence should be given to prove the correlation between curfew and the decrease of crimes is really a causal one.

WH昨天考了3次
正好是我去年碰到的ARGU
抓出来写
居然30分钟内没写完~
FT
差两句话时间到了以后才补上的~~~
开头结尾写久了~~~

呵呵 这就是偶的ARGU模版
我也懒改了 就这样吧~

xin320UID: 165608

The argument is well-organized, but poorly-reasoned. There are several 最好指明几点facets above are problematic. First of all, the argument makes false analogy between the towns of Williamsville and Dalton. In addition, the argument assumes a correlation that accounts for the cause-and-effect relationship. In the end, the speaker above arbitrarily draw the conclusion regardless of other factors that may influence the high rate of the juvenile delinquency and crimes. I will discuss them one by one in the following paragraphs.

In envaluating the possibility of the utilization of the measurements taken in Williamsville, the arguer needs to prove evidence that there are several similiarity, both in social customs and environmental factors. It may be possible that the youth in Dalton prefer to commit crime in the daytime rather than in nights. Thus the curfew is of no use in Dalton while it may prove to be effective in Williamsville. Also it may be the case that the juvenile have inclination to do robbery or to break facilities not in public places, but the places where are comparatively quiet and of few people. Again the restriction of the remaining till night in the public places have nothing to do with it. Thus the speaker has to offer detailed information upon the habits of the youth in Dalton and the usual measurement by which they commit their crimes.

Even if there are suffient evidence shown that the Williamvelle and Dalton are similiar in many aspects, the curfew cannot be used without the further investigation upon the authenticity and reliability of the effectiveness of the curfew. Although it seems the argument has offered abundant statistics above to prove the effectiveness of the action of curfew, no analysis based on the data was given to show that the correlation between curfew and decrease in youth crime. The merely thing that the speaker refers is the time sequence of the curfew and the decrease. However, it cannot convince me that these two things have inference relationships-- let alone the causal relationship. The speaker overlook many other factors that may contribute the decreas in crimes, such as the climate influence-- it is well known that generally speaking the crime rate in winter is much less than that of summer. From this point of view, the speaker merely imagine an unexisting link between two separate factors.我觉得有些句子写得无可挑剔的好，非常值得我借鉴，只是说的太笼统了，没有明确的对其数据进行反驳或者你的假设阿。只提到了没有对数据和现行作分析和因果联系，实际上文中很多具体的东西都没有批驳，例如：reported的问题，没有reporter可能有2个原因（此处可以说是个因果倒置的错误，没有犯罪=〉没报道，反之不真），或者没有犯罪或者reporter有个人倾向不想报道。另外27%下降的绝对数字没有意义，它只说明youth crime下降了，其他的呢？除非它假设所有的犯罪都是youth crime。另外结尾处保护未成年人与youth crime是两个概念，未成年人受害不是youth crime。即使真的一切都降低了，都很好，但是在非宵禁时间怎么样呢？我觉得这点应该可以写到你的下一段，和下一段结合写会比较好，其他问题还有很多，不一一说明了。

Granted that both assumptions in the above two passages are true, the arbitrary conclusion is still open to doubt. Taken the curfew measurement, as the speaker supposed, can the crime rate decrease effectively in Dalton thus decrease the number of the victims of crime? Since the restriction upon the activities of the youth may raise complanation and may even lead to repellation to greater extent, it is hard to promise that the juvenile would obey the rules in silence. More violent crimes would be made out of hatred and dissatisfaction. Meanwhile, given that the juvenille are compliant to obey the curfews, no evidence are offered to promise their protection from the crimes. As we know, often the youth are innocent when getting involved in crime and becoming victims without knowing what happens.

In conclusion, the argument, although seems to be sound at the first glance, commits several 说明主要几点logical 有的不是逻辑错误，是sample比较错误fallacies. The speaker should offer more details about the situation in the two towns, then to compare the similiarity between the two. Also evidence should be given to prove the correlation between curfew and the decrease of crimes is really a causal one.
全文语言上很强，值得我学习，只是在找错误上好像还不是很明确，说得比较模糊，不是很让人信服。

so猫UID: 148633

呵呵 楼上的先谢谢啦
我还有两天 只能努力改进多少是多少罗
呵呵 再次谢谢谢谢~

xin320UID: 165608

我也没几天了，会找错误了，但是语言上还需要多向你们学习，真想推迟考试。我如果语言有你的水平就不用怕了。只是训练找错的能力很快的，相信你一定没问题的。

so猫UID: 148633

鬼鬼具体上MSN说~~~

鬼谷子UID: 159645

Argument239 第1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：30分3秒 539 words
从2005年2月18日14时38分到2005年2月18日15时30分
------题目------
The following appeared as an editorial in the local newspaper of Dalton.
'When the neighboring town of Williamsville adopted a curfew four months ago that made it illegal for persons under the age of 18 to loiter or idle in public places after 10 p.m., youth crime in Williamsville dropped by 27 percent during curfew hours. In Williamsville's town square, the area where its citizens were once most outraged at the high crime rate, not a single crime has been reported since the curfew was introduced. Therefore, to help reduce its own rising crime rate, the town of Dalton should adopt the same kind of curfew. A curfew that keeps young people at home late at night will surely control juvenile delinquency and protect minors from becoming victims of crime.'
------正文------
The argument is well-organized, but poorly-reasoned. 【范文的语言，挺管用的】 There are several facets above are problematic. First of all, the argument makes false analogy between the towns of Williamsville and Dalton. In addition, the argument assumes a correlation that accounts for the cause-and-effect relationship. In the end, the speaker above arbitrarily draw the conclusion regardless of other factors that may influence the high rate of the juvenile delinquency and crimes. I will discuss them one by one in the following paragraphs. 【很好的开头，赞一个！】

In envaluating 【evaluating，检查】the possibility of the utilization of the measurements taken in Williamsville, the arguer needs to prove evidence that there are several similiarity, 【similarity，检查啊。而且，应该说similarity between谁和谁啊】 both in social customs and environmental factors. It may be possible that the youth in Dalton prefer to commit crime in the daytime rather than in nights. Thus the curfew is of no use in Dalton while it may prove to be effective in Williamsville. Also it may be the case that the juvenile have inclination to do robbery or to break facilities not in public places, but the places where are comparatively quiet and of few people. Again the restriction of the remaining till night in the public places have 【has，检查检查】nothing to do with it. Thus the speaker has to offer detailed information upon the habits of the youth in Dalton and the usual measurement by which they commit their crimes. 【这里面似乎混淆了两个错误，一个是W城犯罪减少这个论据的问题，是否是青少年犯罪为主，是否宵禁犯罪减少就表明所有犯罪都减少，是否公广场犯罪减少就等于其他地方犯罪也减少。第二个是，对比的错误，是否D和W的各种情况都相同。不要混在一起说，要分开来说，混在一起说显得逻辑不清而且，哪个都没有说清楚】

Even if there are suffient 【sufficient，唉，无语。】evidence shown that the Williamvelle and Dalton are similiar【similar】 in many aspects, the curfew cannot be used without the further investigation upon the authenticity and reliability of the effectiveness of the curfew. Although it seems the argument has offered abundant statistics above to prove the effectiveness of the action of curfew, no analysis based on the data was given to show that the correlation between curfew and decrease in youth crime. The merely thing that the speaker refers is the time sequence of the curfew and the decrease. However, it cannot convince me that these two things have inference relationships-- let alone the causal relationship. The speaker overlook many other factors that may contribute the decreas 【decrease】in crimes, such as the climate influence-- it is well known that generally speaking the crime rate in winter is much less than that of summer. From this point of view, the speaker merely imagine【imagines】 an unexisting【inexistent】link between two separate factors. 【这个问题就应该是上段里面混淆的第一个问题，像你这段这样空说没什么反例是不行的】

Granted that both assumptions in the above two passages are true, the arbitrary conclusion is still open to doubt. Taken the curfew measurement, as the speaker supposed, can the crime rate decrease effectively in Dalton thus decrease the number of the victims of crime? Since the restriction upon the activities of the youth may raise complanation【平面化？？？complaints】 and may even lead to repellation 【rebellion？】to greater extent, it is hard to promise that the juvenile would obey the rules in silence. More violent crimes would be made out of hatred and dissatisfaction. Meanwhile, given that the juvenille 【juvenile】are compliant to obey the curfews, no evidence are offered to promise their protection from the crimes. As we know, often the youth are innocent when getting involved in crime and becoming victims without knowing what happens. 【这段的想法还不错】

In conclusion, the argument, although seems to be sound at the first glance, commits several logical fallacies. The speaker should offer more details about the situation in the two towns, then to compare the similiarity between the two. Also evidence should be given to prove the correlation between curfew and the decrease of crimes is really a causal one.

【typo太多了！！要注意检查！不要把错误混在一起说。把B1的第一个错误和B2合在一起，这篇文章就成功了。加油！】

yilingspUID: 164588

我写的同一篇argument ，大家帮忙看看吧，谢谢！526
The editorial concludes that Dalton should adopt the same curfew as Williamsville. And the author recommendation that the curfew could control juvenile delinquency and protect minors from becoming victims of crime as well. To support these recommendations the author cites that in Williamsville, youth crime dropped by 27 percent during the curfew hours and in a square, where was a high crime rate area, not a crime has been reported since the curfew was introduced four months ago. As a careful analysis of the fact that the author point out, several fallacies could find in this argument.

First of all, the author make a fallacy of "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc" in assuming that during the curfew hours the crime rate was decrease is the cause of adopted a curfew. The only evidence offered to support the claim is that just during the curfew hours the crime rate was dropped by 27 percent. However, the evidence is insufficient to establish the claim in question because a mere chronological relationship is only one of the indicators of a causal relationship. Because their may other reasons to explain this situation. For exempla, during the curfew hours, Williamsville’s polices also strengthen their power to protect the citizens. And that maybe the peer reason to result in the crime rate dropped. So unless the author gives more information to support that the curfew is the reason of the dropping crime rate.

Secondly, the argument commits a fallacy of appeal to ignorance in assuming that the crime rate of the Williamsville's town square was dropped to zero. However, the evidence offered that no one crime has been reported is insufficient to support the claim: no reported is not mean no crime. It is entirely possible that no one want to report crime happened there considering in the past, there is no effort of reporting the crime in there. Thus, lacking more information about the conditions about the square, we can not assume that the crime rate of the square was rarely dropped. Even if the crime rate is rarely dropped, we still have no evidence to conclude that curfew is the reason.

Even if the curfew could drop the crime rate of the Williamsville, the argument still can not conclude that curfew will drop the crime rate of Dalton too. The argument suffers from a fallacy of "All things are equal". The author assumes without justification that two towns crime rate have a different background conditions. As no information about whether the conditions in two towns are same, the conclusion based on this is unwarranted.

Moreover, the author also point out that curfew will protect minors from becoming victims of crime. The common sense tells me that most crime which hurt minors is not happened in the outside and not in public places after 10 p.m. So have no more evidence to support the curfew will protect minors, the recommendation is worthy doubt.

In sum, the author's recommendation based on the evidence of Williamsville is not persuasive as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author should prove that curfew could decrease the crime rate and protect minors as well.