Argument163 新房子节能赚钱 求砖呀~~~

connieUID: 203382

唉，因为室友电话中限时没有成功：（
163 The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.
'In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham.'

This argument asserted that the old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the people employed by the town. To support this, the arguer claimed that the cost of the heat system in the old hall is inefficient and higher in price for per square foot. Further, the arguer stated the rest of the space of the new building could generate income for the town of Rockingham. Seen from all the above, the argument is fraught with logical problems and therefore cannot convince me the conclusion he or she draws.

First, the arguer assumes that a small room is equal to an uncomfortable room. Common sense tells me that the coziness depends on the room itself, not the size of it. If people owns a room, and live in it with the ones they love, though it may be a little tight in space, it is comfortable and happy. On the contrary, the room big enough in size may lack good adornments so that people living in it may feel uncomfortable. Lacking the evidence of the case above, the arguer cannot simply put forward the claim the old building should be torn down.

Second, there is another assumption that the larger space generated from the new building will take no more energy to run the building heat system. Although it cost less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall, there is no evidence to show that the total space will stay the same. If the sum of the area in the new building is much more than that of the old one, the cost will obviously increase a lot than before. Accordingly, the assumption is fallacious.

Finally, in concluding that the new building will create income is based on the third assumption that there will be space left to rent out. As mentioned in the argument, there may be too many people for the town to afford the accommodation. So it is entirely possible that even with the new building there are still inadequate apartment for all the citizens. Moreover, there might be other possibilities that the employed people who are not the local citizens would like to live in Rockingham for convenience. Thus, in guaranteeing the income mentioned the arguer should rule out these possibilities.

To sum up, the argument is unpersuasive for the three unsupportive assumptions. To lend support to it, the arguer must provide more data about the correlation between the space and the energy. To better access the conclusion, the arguer should also prove the remnant space for renting out so that it can convince me.

点点滴滴走过UID: 195083

加油呀

点点滴滴走过UID: 195083

注意发贴格式

点点滴滴走过UID: 195083

注意发贴格式

connieUID: 203382

我哪里没有对呀？好象是按斑斑的帖子里的要求的呀

yogurt4UID: 198389

来学习一下你的啊狗

yogurt4UID: 198389

唉，因为室友电话中限时没有成功：（
163 The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.
'In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham.'

This argument asserted that the old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the people employed by the town. 我觉得题目的论点在省钱。 To support this, the arguer claimed   claimsthat the cost of the heat system in the old hall is inefficient cost is inefficient? and higher in price for不要这个for per square foot. Further, the arguer stated the rest of the space of the new building could generate income profits for the town of Rockingham. Seen from all the above, the argument is fraught with logical problems and therefore cannot convince me the conclusion he or she draws.
注意一下时态^-^       

First, the arguer assumes that a small room is equal to an uncomfortable room. Common sense tells me that the coziness depends on the room itself, not the size of it. If people owns a room, and live in it with the ones they love, though it may be a little tight in space, it is comfortable and happy. On the contrary, the room big enough in size may lack good adornments so that people living in it may feel uncomfortable. Lacking the evidence of the case above, the arguer cannot simply put forward the claim the old building should be torn down.这个攻击点似乎不是题目的主要破绽。

Second, there is another assumption that the larger space generated from the new building 有一点小怪。New building’s larger space…好一些。will take no more energy to run the building heat system. Although it cost less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall, there is no evidence to show that the total space will stay the same. If the sum of the area in the new building is much more than that of the old one, the cost will obviously increase a lot than before. Accordingly, the assumption is fallacious.

Finally, in concluding the conclusion that the new building will create income is based on the third assumption that there will be space left to rent out. As mentioned in the argument, there may be too many people for the town in need of 注意一下这栋大楼的作用。 to afford the accommodation. So it is entirely possible that even with the new building there are still inadequate apartment for all the citizens. Moreover, there might be other possibilities that the employed people who are not the local citizens would like to live in Rockingham for convenience. Thus, in guaranteeing the income mentioned the arguer should rule out these possibilities.

To sum up, the argument is unpersuasive for the three unsupportive assumptions. To lend support to it, the arguer must provide more data about the correlation between the space and the energy. To better access我怀疑这里是assess the conclusion, the arguer should also prove the remnant space for renting out so that it can convince me.
开头的论点错了，这是个大问题，要注意。驳斥的时候往最值得你反驳的地方下手。结尾写的不错。
我好像找不到几个月底考试的人了。有个mm 29号。大家都要挺住来着。加油。