argument2 <aspire互改小组>第二次作业

kooyiiUID: 2177986

第二次作业(07.01.31)
2.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."
Position:呵呵,这次肯定是strongly反对了吧?

     In this argument ,the author concludes that the community of Deerhaven acres should make the same action like Brookville to raise the property values. At first glance, the author's reasoning seem to be appealing, while clearly examining the
author's reasoning we may find that it is unconvincing. The arguer rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and it therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

      First of all. the author's fail to convince us that the specific condition of twocommunities could be comparable although they are quite close .It is possible that Brookville is a small community with fewer homes, which is an undeveloped place seven years ago .While the community of Deerhaven Acres is a much large territory with a large scale of apartment building and houses. Without providing any proof that the circumstance of the two community is similar ,there is no support for the idea of imitating the Brookville's experience in Deerhaven  Acers.

      In addition, the author commits “after this, and therefore because of this” fallacy. The causal relationship between the cause of landscaped yard and the painted house and the effect of tripling the cost of property value is unwarranted. It is entirely possible that one or more other factors were instead responsible for the increase, like the development of economy. This is a fallacious reasoning unless the author can provide persuasive evidences to rule out the connection between the cause and effect.

        Finally, the most glaring flaw in this argument lies with the reasoning in the last sentence. The arguer states that by unifying the appearance like Brookville, DA will raise property value. The fact of the matter is that, the property price is rely on the requirement of DA's home-buyers ,no evidence is provided to show that the home-buyers of DA is more interested in the exterior appearance. Other wise, it also lack of mention that the identical appearance will be much more attractive.

       To sum up, the conclusion lacks of credibility. Regardless of who the author is, he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore many aspects of his or her conclusion. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should give more evidences  about the above-mentioned possibilities.

seven741UID: 2260128

In this argument ,the author concludes that the community of Deerhaven acres should make(take) the same(similar更好) action like(as) Brookville to raise the property values. At first glance, the author's reasoning seem(s) to be appealing, while clearly(further更好) examining the author's reasoning we may find that it is unconvincing. The arguer rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and it (is) therefore unpersuasive as it stands.（我看到孙远的模版都是开头一段把逻辑错误都具体指出来的）
      First of all. the author's(author) fail(fails) to convince us that the specific(pecific用在这里读起来觉得不顺)condition of (these)two communities could be comparable although they are quite close(in distance) .It is possible that Brookville is a small community with fewer homes, which is(was) developed place seven years ago(这个从句的表达有点中文化，读起来别扭。直接写：located in less developed areas) .While(,while 不需要重列一句) the community of Deerhaven Acres is a much large territory(much larger community) with a large(larger) scale(number) of apartment building(buildings) and houses. Without providing any proof that the circumstance(circumstances) of the two community(communities) is(are) similar ,there is no support for(出于主谓一致的原则，应改成the author fails to support ) the idea of (Deerhaven’s)imitating the Brookville's experience(restrictions更好,imitate宾语不能是抽象的experience) in Deerhaven  Acers.
      In addition, the author commits (the) “after this, and therefore because of this” fallacy. The causal relationship between the cause of landscaped yard and the painted house and the effect of tripling the cost of property value is unwarranted. It is entirely possible that one or more other factors were instead responsible for the increase, like the development of economy. This is a fallacious reasoning unless the author can provide persuasive evidences to rule out(rule out是排除的意思吧，所以用justify)the connection between the cause and effect.
        Finally, the most glaring flaw in this argument lies with the reasoning in the last sentence. The arguer states that by unifying the appearance like Brookville, DA will raise (its) property value. The fact of the matter(是不是matter of fact) is that, the property price is(删掉) rely(relies) on the requirement of DA's home-buyers ,(yet)no evidence is provided to show that the home-buyers of DA is more interested in the exterior appearance. Other wise, it also lack(lacks) of (删掉)mention that the identical appearance will be much more attractive.
       To sum up, the conclusion lacks of(删掉) credibility. Regardless of who the author is, he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore many aspects of his or her conclusion. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should give more evidences about(是不是应该用排除，to rule out) the above-mentioned possibilities.

注：
1.感觉是模版套用多于逻辑分析，看起来很累，还是要多用自己的句子；
2.个人认为你倒数第二段的逻辑错误并不成立，因为作者并不是通过说统一外观使资产升值，而是通过你第一点的类比得到的结论；
3.句子太短，没有复杂性；
4.文字有待加强。

[ 本帖最后由 seven741 于 2007-2-2 20:41 编辑 ]

kooyiiUID: 2177986

恩,呵呵~直接套了个模版就上了~图个方便,下次写肯定会用自己的东西了~

77的很多意见很中肯啊~没仔细的检查，犯了好多低级别的错误，真的很抱歉～

倒数第二段我的意思是批驳“In order to raise property
values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on
landscaping and housepainting."这句话，逻辑错误应该是成立的，但是我的重心描写得不好～我再改改～

我把整篇改完后再发上来～

句子跟文字.....这些都要慢慢地积累学习了～
谢谢77改得那么详细～～～～