- 最后登录
- 2013-5-13
- 在线时间
- 860 小时
- 寄托币
- 46892
- 声望
- 46
- 注册时间
- 2004-9-17
- 阅读权限
- 175
- 帖子
- 507
- 精华
- 52
- 积分
- 18389
- UID
- 178961
   
- 声望
- 46
- 寄托币
- 46892
- 注册时间
- 2004-9-17
- 精华
- 52
- 帖子
- 507
|
今天下午花了一个小时写的,我的ARGUMENT 7 处女作,欢迎大家拍砖!
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.
"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."换新的市长,以改善环境那篇。
In this argument, the arguer intends to prove that in the next mayoral election, we should vote for Ann Green. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that the current members of the council are not protecting the environment, the arguer reasons that during the past year, the number of the factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution have increased to an unprecedented level and the members of patients with respiratory illness has raised. This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.
To begin with, the arguer fails to convince us that the current members of the Clearview town council are not protecting the environment. The arguer simply assumes that the deteriorated environment was attributed to the council, albeit, there are several other reasons that can be traced. As we know, the people’s action is the most affective factor. If all the residents of Clearview have no consciousness of maintaining the environment, apparently, they will pollute the water by washing in the poor, as well as throwing garbage everywhere. Once these happen, the environment will be worsen whatever the current members of the council had endeavored to protect it.
Another problem that undermines the argument is that the arguer does not provide concrete evidence to demonstrate that Frank Braun is not concerned about and should be responsible for the listed environmental problems. Being lack of suffices specific testimonies, it is impossible and unreasonable to establish such a conclusion. As the mayor of the city, it is his obligation and responsibility to protect the environment of the city. Difficulties and obstructs may hinder the mayor’ practice of improving the air and water conditions.
Finally, the assumption that all the environmental problems will be solved with the election of Ann Green as mayor of the city is totally unfounded. There is no evidence that Ann Green is qualified as a good mayor who can solve all the environmental problems in Clearview even though he is a popular candidate.
In conclusion, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to prove that Frank Braun and the members of the council really did nothing to protect the environment of Clearview, moreover, I would suspend my judgment about the credibility of the new mayor until more information regarding Ann Green would be provided.
[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-6-15 at 23:53 ] |
|