- 最后登录
- 2009-10-6
- 在线时间
- 1179 小时
- 寄托币
- 27004
- 声望
- 100
- 注册时间
- 2005-11-3
- 阅读权限
- 175
- 帖子
- 586
- 精华
- 22
- 积分
- 28067
- UID
- 2154168
![Rank: 11](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level3.gif) ![Rank: 11](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level3.gif) ![Rank: 11](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level2.gif) ![Rank: 11](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level1.gif)
- 声望
- 100
- 寄托币
- 27004
- 注册时间
- 2005-11-3
- 精华
- 22
- 帖子
- 586
|
昨天被拍明白了:https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=646151
今天未限时尝试改掉缺点
TOPIC: ARGUMENT214 - In each city in theregion of Treehaven, the majority of the money spent on government-run publicschool education comes from taxes that each city government collects. Theregion's cities differ, however, in the value they place on public education.For example, Parson City typically budgets twice as much money per yearas Blue City does for its public schools-eventhough both cities have about the same number of residents. It seems clear,therefore, that Parson City residents care more about public schooleducation than do Blue City residents.
WORDS: 553 TIME: 1:42:15 DATE: 2007-4-12
The author of this argument concludes thatcities in the region of Treehaven are different on funding public schools. Heor she illustrates this point by a comparison between Parson City (PC) and BlueCity (BC). However, this example can not even prove difference on the valueplaced on public education of the two cities, not to mention the author'sconclusion of the same dissimilarity among all cities in that region.
Firstly, the comparison make by the authorbetween PC and BC is incomplete and thus unsound. To demonstrate a point bycomparing the two objects, one should first eliminate those factors affectingthe element being contracted; unfortunately, the author fails to do so. Thereis no information concerning schoolchildren population in the two cities; thusit is possible that students in PC greatly outnumber those in BC, despite thesimilar number of residents at all ages. Such difference might be due to PC'sestablished reputation of its public school education, whereas BC has enjoyed along fame of its great welfare for retirees. To better evaluate government'sconcern of public education, I suggest the author calculate the average amountof money placed on each individual student. Moreover, the author also neglectsgovernment revenues of the two different cities. Perhaps, PC imposes higher taxrates than BC and/or enjoys its developed regional economy; thus PCgovernment's income could significantly outstrips BC's. Under suchcircumstances, twice amount of money can not justify residents' dissimilar careof education. The author needs to take the proportion of education funding oftotal budget into account before concluding various attitude on publiceducation of the cities' residents.
Another problem of this argument is thatthe author unfairly assigns government budgets as the only representative ofresidential concern on public education. In actual practice, citizens commonlyexpress their regard of public education through other means. For example,though the majority of funding for school comes from government budget, privatedonations might nonetheless be an undeniable contributor of maintaining andimproving public education. Perhaps such donations serve a better measure thangovernment budget when investigation residential concern of public education.Even private donations are incomparable to government budget, there might stillbe some conducts of residents which can disprove the author's assertion.Possibly, people lived at BC constantly launch campaigns for educationalpurpose, like giving lectures of a specific field to school students or donatingbooks to school libraries. Solely emphasizing on government budget, like theauthor does, is oversimplification and thus unconvincing.
Finally, granted that difference ongovernment budget of PC and BC is demonstrative and thus dissimilar attitude topublic education of residents in the two cities in proved, assuming these twocities is a proper representative of all cities in Treehaven region isquestionable. No information concerning government budget, private donation orother factors which could show residential attitude on public education ofcities other than the illustrated two. Therefore, the author fails to answerthe question of whether PC and BC are exceptions in the region or suitable examplefrom all cities. Before economic condition, resident number, and so forth areall considered in reasoning, the author conclusion on difference among citiesin Treehaven region has little credibility.
To sum up, faultycomparison, incomplete thought, and mistake in choosing example render thisargument an unconvincing one.
[ 本帖最后由 wingerwesker 于 2007-4-12 16:21 编辑 ] |
|