argument2 [越洋农场站队]第一次写，欢迎猛拍

bearhjUID: 2218990

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
WORDS: 386          TIME: 0:29:09          DATE: 2006-7-27

In this analysis, the arguer claims that homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should adopt their own set of restrictios on landscaping and housepainting to increase property values. In support of this prediction, the arguer cites the improved situation in nearby Brookville community as example. Attributing the enormous upgrade in property values there to the adoption of a set of restrictions, the arguer advocates doing the same in order to achieve the same success. This argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

One major assumption is the causal relationship claimed between implementation of new restrictions and the high property values, which is vague and unwarranted. As we all know, property values fluctuate with many factors, including marketing, house condition, environment, political influence and community culture. The improved situation might attribute to any one of these elements or some, thus it is insensible and irresponsible to draw the assumption by only referring to the new policy. Admittedly, setting rules on the scale and the colors of the exterior walls will make the community more harmonious and more attractive; however, how well it contributed to the improvement is unknown, thus cannot become a solid foundation for the prediction.

Another point worth considering is the time. The arguer points out that Brookville community adopted the policy seven years ago, a period of time long enough to make enormous change. What has happened during these seven years is still a myth, with no statistics reflecting the changing market, buying habits and personal interests shifts. It is not persuasive enough to take this 7-year-ago case as the predictive basis, for seldom would have interest in a passed-away matter, unless sufficient recent market information is provided.

In addition, the arguer commits a fallacy of false analogy. What has stated in the text is the geographical similarity between two communities; while we cannot discover any analogies. It is impossible to find out anything relevant to the community such as their environmental condition, transportation convenience, or population. Without firm statistical and factual support, we cannot make the comparison, which means that the example is misused.

To conclude, the arguer fails to provide sufficient and persuasive evidences to support the assumption. To solidify the argument, the arguer would have to produce more evidence concerning the changing market and great similarity between these two communities.

[ 本帖最后由 bearhj 于 2006-7-28 00:09 编辑 ]

runningpiggyUID: 194977

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

发贴格式不对，请根据上面链接的这个贴子自己修改，谢谢！