Argument137 请帮忙打个分吧

bluebirdcstonyUID: 197396

周四考,这几天状态一直不好,以前写过的ISSUE也不会写了.只写了这个,请帮忙看一下,不用改,只打个分就行啊,谢谢了.
刚发的那个打不开,又发了一篇,请版主别生气啊


Argument137  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2秒     540 words
从2005年3月10日10时29分到2005年3月10日10时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.
'At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River.'
------正文------
In this argument, the author recommends that Mason River council increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River. To support this recommendation, the author points out that fear of the unclean water prevented the local people from doing any water sports. To further support this argument, the author points out that the agency responsible for rivers in their region has announced plans to clean up Mason. At first glance, this argument has some merits; however, careful scrutiny of the argument reveals several critical problems, which render the author's position untenable.

To begin with, the assertion that the river is unclean is open to doubt. The author provides insufficient to substantiate this assumption. Though there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, the author neglects to indicate how many people actually complaint about. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that there are hundreds of thousands residents while only several of them complained about; or the river only unclean in a small part of the river, which is far away from the residents, even the agency responsible for rivers clean up them, actually, it has nothing to do with the residents.

Another problem has to do with the survey cited in the argument. When samples are used to make a general idea about a particular group, the samples should be sufficient enough in number to ensure its representative ness, and the samples should be randomly chosen across the whole resident spectrum. However, we know nothing about the survey's methodology. Perhaps the survey included only a small percentage of the whole residents, or only people who are interested in water sports participated in the survey. Without ruling out such possibilities, it is impossible to assess the survey's reliability.

Even assuming the survey is statistically reliable, it does not follow that these people really want to do more water sports. Perhaps they just feel such sports are interesting, but actually, they won't do it themselves. Common sense informs me that many times, people just interested in some thing the lack of, but if they really have it, a few days later, they may turn to other matters which they lack. Besides, even their interest will persist, it does not  necessary mean that they will do water sports in Mason River, perhaps there have many water sport facilities nearby in gymnasts, due to their convenient facilities, people are more preferred to attend to the gymnast rather than do water sports on the Mason River. Besides, the author neglects to indicate how long residents have to wait before the agency clean the river.

Last but not least, the author's recommendation for increasing budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River is problematic. The author ignores to point out what the current lands conditions. Lacking such information, it is entirely possible that the publicly owned lands along the Mason River are in very good conditions, there is no need for the council to do any improvements.

To sum up, the author's recommendation is unconvincing. To strengthen it, the author should provide sound evidence that the river is really polluted and residents are very going to do water sports if the river get clean again.

bluebirdcstonyUID: 197396

自己UP

bluebirdcstonyUID: 197396

算了,大家也都挺忙的.还有两天,我自己能看多少就看多少啦.
其实感觉自己都有点放弃了