Argument141【~4而后生~小组】第7次作业 有拍必回

virilityUID: 2310179

题目：ARGUMENT141 - The following appeared in a newsletter distributed at a recent political rally.
"Over the past year, the Consolidated Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over one million square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in pollution and environmental disaster, since West Fredonia is home to several endangered animal species. But such disaster can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC's copper until the company abandons its mining plans."
字数：383          用时：0:28:52          日期：2007-3-29
In this arguement,the author concludes that the pollution and environmental disaster can be prevented if conssumers simply refuse to purchaseproducts that are made with CCC's copper until the compay abandons its mining plans. At first glance, the author's reasoning seems to be appealing, while clearly examing the author's reasoning, we may find that it is unconvincing. The arguement contains several facets that are questionable.
Firstly, the arguement is based on the problematic assumptions that mining copper in the nation of West Fredonia will inevitably cause pollution and environmental disater. It is no deny that the reasoning is too arbitrary to convince us. There are countless copper mine all over the world, not all copper mining will lead to pollution and environmental disaster inevitably. There is no necessary relations between these two accidents. If enough environment protect measures are taken, the disaster will be avoided.
In addition, the arguer commits a fallacy of begging the question in assuming that consumers would be willing to refuse to purchase products made with CCC's copper, because not all the consumers are the members of the nation of West Fredonia, maybe consumers do not care the pollution and environment disaster, even some consumer will be indifferent to it.And everyone preserve the right to buy products freely, even if consumers know the harm to nation of West Fredonia, he or she still has the right to choose the CCC's copper, which may take the low price advantage.
Finally, the arguer fails to take into account other measures that might help prevent the environmental disaster, just like many other copper mine in the world, which may make little pollution to environment, we can take advantage of high-tech methods to prevent the ntion from disater, and the nation and the company can negotiate with the environment problem, every coin has two sides, the aim of the negotiation is to take the win-win situation. Not confining to above measures, in my view, a great number of measures can be taken to take help prevent the environmental disaster.
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 evidence about the above-mentioned possibilities.