argement56 [Smile－A组]第二次作业

枫晰UID: 2123661

The arguer concludes that collector should expect the decreased value of life-size sculptures and the increased value of the miniatures. To justify this conclusion the arguer relies on a study conclusion that the ancient Kalinese artists used models of actual bodies instead of sculpting tools and techniques and some of its follow up explanation of style of Kalinese's sculpting. However, the arguer fails to convince us the conclusion as it is established on a series of false assumption.

In the first place, discovery of the model of human heads is impossible to conclude that the life-size clay statues are surely made by these molds. It is entirely possible that this model is just for the sculptors to exercise the techniques, or perhaps these molds are also the works of the sculptor. After all, there isn't any the necessary information about the size, the similar degree of the molds with the actual bodies, the models of other part of human bodies, and so forth. Further more ,perhaps the size of the molds is too small comparing the life-size clay statues and in this size the molds only can be imitate to sculpt the statues, or perhaps the molds is made so abstract and entirely different in style so that they are only be used in the miniatures instead of the life size sculptures. The arguer fails to tell us more information about the models

In the second place the arguer falsely assumed that the change of the sculpting means will serve to the fluctuation of the value. Maybe it is because of this development that the collectors wake up to the value of the life-size sculptors, as the trivial progress of making molds of actual bodies than just sculpting on the clay. Further more, even the life-size statues will decrease in value and it doesn’t mean that the miniatures will be increase in value, it is entirely possible to hold the price just as before.

Additionally, the arguer fails to establish a casual relationship between the use of mold to sculpt the life-size statues and the few discoveries of the tools. The arguer fail to consider other possible factors that lead to this phenomena, may be the tools are hard to preserved in so long time, or perhaps the tool is so frangible that the sculptor have to change frequently and the broken ones have been used in other ways

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the arguer must provide more reliable study to show relationship between the discovery and the value, more information to justify that the discovery can draw the conclusion of the real means of making the sculptures.

xinxinwUID: 2144273

The arguer concludes that collector should expect the decreased value of life-size sculptures and the increased value of the miniatures. To justify this conclusion the arguer relies on a study conclusion that the ancient Kalinese artists used models of actual bodies instead of sculpting tools and techniques and some of its follow（following） up explanation of style of Kalinese's sculpting. However, the arguer fails to convince us the conclusion as it is established on a series of false assumption.

In the first place, discovery of the model of human heads is impossible to conclude that the life-size clay statues are surely made by these molds. It is entirely possible that this model is just for the sculptors to exercise the techniques, or perhaps these molds are also the works of the sculptor. After all, there isn't any the necessary information about the size, the similar degree（degree of similarity） of the molds with the actual bodies, the models of other part of human bodies, and so forth. Further more ,perhaps the size of the molds is too small comparing the life-size clay statues and in this size the molds only can be imitate to sculpt the statues, or perhaps the molds is made so abstract and entirely different in style so that they are only be used in the miniatures instead of the life size sculptures. The arguer fails to tell us more information about the models. futhermore 前后的内容实际上是一致的，直接指出molds和figure的大小风格是否相符就可以了

In the second place the arguer falsely assumed that the change of the sculpting means will serve不是这样用的 to the fluctuation of the value. Maybe it is because of this development that the collectors wake up to the value of the life-size sculptors, as the trivial progress of making molds of actual bodies than just sculpting on the clay语法. Further more, even the life-size statues will decrease in value and it doesn’t mean that the miniatures will be increase in value, it is entirely possible to hold the price just as before.最后这个没有展开

Additionally, the arguer fails to establish a casual relationship between the use of mold to sculpt the life-size statues and the few discoveries of the tools. The arguer fail to consider other possible factors that lead to this phenomena, may be the tools are hard to preserved in so long time, or perhaps the tool is so frangible that the sculptor have to change frequently and the broken ones have been used in other ways

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the arguer must provide more reliable study to show relationship between the discovery and the value, more information to justify that the discovery can draw the conclusion of the real means of making the sculptures.

攻击顺序应该做调整

EmmanuelleUID: 2231740

The arguer concludes that collector(s) should expect the decreased value of life-size sculptures and the increased value of the miniatures. To justify this conclusion the arguer relies on a study conclusion(也可用result，一个句子里重复用一个词比较单调) that the ancient Kalinese artists used models of actual bodies instead of sculpting tools and techniques and some of its follow up explanation(s) of style of Kalinese's sculpting. However, the arguer fails to convince us the conclusion as it is established on a series of false assumption.

In the first place, discovery of the model of human heads is impossible to conclude that the life-size clay statues are surely made by these molds. It is entirely possible that this model is just for the sculptors to exercise the techniques, or perhaps these molds are also the works of the sculptor. After all, there isn't any the(delete) necessary information about the size, the similar degree of the molds with the actual bodies, the models of other part of human bodies, and so forth. Further more ,perhaps the size of the molds is too small comparing the life-size clay statues and in this size the molds only can be imitate to sculpt the statues(这点跟前面size好像重复) ,or perhaps the molds is made so abstract and entirely different in style so that they are only be used in the miniatures instead of the life size sculptures. （我觉得既然是模具就谈不上抽象了）The arguer fails to tell us more information about the models

In the second place the arguer falsely assumed(assumes) that the change of the sculpting means will serve to the fluctuation of the value. Maybe it is because of this development that the collectors wake up to the value of the life-size sculptors, as the trivial progress of making molds of actual bodies than just sculpting on the clay. Further more, even the life-size statues will decrease in value and it doesn’t mean that the miniatures will be increase in value, it is entirely possible to hold the price just as before.

Additionally, the arguer fails to establish a casual(causal) relationship between the use of mold to sculpt the life-size statues and the few discoveries of the tools. The arguer fail(s) to consider other possible factors that lead to this phenomena, may be the tools are hard to preserved in so long time, or perhaps the tool is so frangible that the sculptor have to change frequently and the broken ones have been used in other ways (这两段顺序可以换下,而且这段结束得有点唐突，多讲点内容)

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the arguer must provide more reliable study to show relationship between the discovery and the value, more information to justify that the discovery can draw the conclusion of the real means of making the sculptures.

攻击点是对的，不过一个是顺序不太好，再有展开的不多。每一点结束的太快，可以加个小结的句子。
另外个人认为这个argument的结论不仅仅是价值升降。
以上仅为个人观点，供参考。:)