Argument16 第一次写，大家狠批，用了N久

haieryuUID: 2291571

16The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper from a citizen of the state of Impecunia.

"Two years ago our neighboring state, Lucria, began a state lottery to supplement tax revenues for education and public health. Today, Lucria spends more per pupil than we do, and Lucria's public health program treats far more people than our state's program does. If we were to establish a state lottery like the one in Lucria, the profits could be used to improve our educational system and public health program. The new lottery would doubtless be successful, because a survey conducted in our capital city concludes that citizens of Impecunia already spend an average of $50 per person per year on gambling."

In this argument, the author concludes that Impercunia should establish a state lottery to improve its educational system and public health program like its neighboring state Lucria. However, close scrutiny on the evidence provided by the author lends little credible support to this conclusion.

First of all, the author claims that the aim of establishing the state lottery is to improve the education and public health. However, the author fails to provide the evidence that the education and public health conditions are poor. It is possible that the education and public health are fine that every pupil gets well educated, the investment on the education is enough, sick people receive well treatment and public health program goes very well. It is probably no need to establish such a state lottery. Without knowing the conditions of the education and public health, the statement of establishing the state lottery is questionable.

Furthermore, the much money spends on per pupil and the treatment of far more people provide no absolute evidence that Lucria’s education and public health conditions are fine. It is probably that Lucria has a state university, and Impercunia not, the development of a university needs more investment which raises the average money on pupils. As to the treatment of far more people, perhaps Lucria has more people than Impercunia or now people in Lucria are getting an infectious disease while People in Impercunia are in a good health condition, so Lucria needs to treat more people. More over, even if Lucria’s education and health conditions are better than Impericunia, the author provides no evidence that the advantage is getting by investing the money from the state lottery. It is probably the state lottery of Lucria is losing money, and Lucria raises the tax of the products and people’s salaries to improve the conditions of education and public health.

Finally, as to the survey, the author fails to provide assurances that the these respondents are representatives of the overall populations, perhaps most of the respondents are gamblers, or the Impercunia people usually travels to the other state to gamble, and it is also possible people in Impercunia prefer other kind of gambles like dicing to lottery. More over, even if the survey is valid, Impercunia people like spending money on lottery, the other problems that would be brought should also be considered. It is probably that after the establishing of the lottery, Impercunia people would enjoy gambling, they spend more money and time on gambling, have little time with their families, this would result in the raise of divorcing rate, and more laid offs. Therefore, impercunia would have to spend money and human resources on handling those social problems, the money gained from lottery would probably not supplement the money spent on social problems.

In sum, the argument is not convincing as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide the information about the education and public health conditions, and the sufficient evidence that Impercunia would be beneficial. To better evaluate this argument, I need more information about Lucria.

haieryuUID: 2291571

:funk:

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

In this argument, the author concludes that Impercunia should establish a state lottery to improve its educational system and public health program like its neighboring state Lucria. However, close scrutiny on the evidence provided by the author lends little credible support to this conclusion（语法错误）.

First of all, the author claims that the aim of establishing the state lottery is to improve the education and public health.（ts要指出错误，只说一句论据让读者都不知道你要攻击哪一点） However, the author fails to provide the evidence that the education and public health conditions are poor.（能提高就好，不一定要poor才行，这一点根本不能算错误） It is possible that the education and public health are fine that every pupil gets well educated, the investment on the education is enough, sick people receive well treatment and public health program goes very well. It is probably no need to establish such a state lottery（语法。。。）. Without knowing the conditions of the education and public health, the statement of establishing the state lottery is questionable.（主谓不一致）
（第一个body失败）

Furthermore, the much money spends on per pupil and the treatment of far more people provide no absolute evidence that Lucria’s education and public health conditions are fine.（再次找错攻击点：作者提出这个论据是想说明education and public health conditions变better，而不是fine因此我们应该主要反驳的是这些情况没有变好，而不是这些情况不好）） It is probably that Lucria has a state university, and Impercunia not, the development of a university needs more investment which raises the average money on pupils.（这个反例想说明什么？） As to the treatment of far more people, perhaps Lucria has more people than Impercunia or now people in Lucria are getting an infectious disease while People in Impercunia are in a good health condition, so Lucria needs to treat more people. More over, even if Lucria’s education and health conditions are better than Impericunia, the author provides no evidence that the advantage is getting by investing the money from the state lottery. （这个层次狂偏离ts）It is probably the state lottery of Lucria is losing money, and Lucria raises the tax of the products and people’s salaries to improve the conditions of education and public health.
（第二个body失败once more）

Finally, as to the survey, the author fails to provide assurances that the these respondents are representatives of the overall populations, perhaps most of the respondents are gamblers, or the Impercunia people usually travels to the other state to gamble, and it is also possible people in Impercunia prefer other kind of gambles like dicing to lottery. （这么长的ts，晕死，拆成两句吧）More over, even if the survey is valid, Impercunia people like spending money on lottery, the other problems that would be brought should also be considered. （再次偏离ts。。。）It is probably that after the establishing of the lottery, Impercunia people would enjoy gambling, they spend more money and time on gambling, have little time with their families, this would result in the raise of divorcing rate, and more laid offs. Therefore, impercunia would have to spend money and human resources on handling those social problems, the money gained from lottery would probably not supplement the money spent on social problems.

In sum, the argument is not convincing as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide the information about the education and public health conditions, and the sufficient evidence that Impercunia would be beneficial. To better evaluate this argument, I need more information about Lucria.

不说什么了
Lz这篇文章逻辑极为混乱，
First, ts不能点明错误
What is more, even if ts能指出错误，攻击点也不太正确
Finally, even if 错误找对，论证也不能围绕ts展开and举得反例都有点ambiguous
语法错误也太多了
呵呵
建议lz多看看牛人的文章

荧惑UID: 2280559

多看看Iloveissue的吧....

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

...

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

原来lz是第一次写啊，那还不要紧

haieryuUID: 2291571

谢谢iloveissue，心里很急啊，快考了。我会继续努力的
To荧惑 言之有理，呵呵

haieryuUID: 2291571

to ILoveissue, 什么样的开头比较好呢，我很困惑

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

你的开头改一改语法错误还是不错的