Argument216 【0710G 五一互助小组】7月14日 by c0053

c0053UID: 2285120

题目：ARGUMENT216 - The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement.

"Because of its spectacular natural beauty and consistent climate, Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire. As a bonus, housing costs in Clearview have fallen significantly during the past year, and real estate taxes remain lower than those in neighboring towns. Nevertheless, Clearview's mayor promises many new programs to improve schools, streets, and public services. Retirees in Clearview can also expect excellent health care as they grow older, since the number of physicians in the area is far greater than the national average."
字数：510          用时：45min          日期：2007-7-14

In this argument, the arguer recommends that retirees should choose Clearview(CV) as their place to retire. To substantiate his claim, the arguer provides evidence that the housing costs in CV is low and the health care is excellent. The arguer also cites the mayor's promise that many new programs will be conducted in CV to improve schools, streets and public services. A careful examination will reveal how groundless this argument is.

In the first place, the arguer fails to convince us that the housing costs in CV are low. Although the arguer claims that the housing costs in CV have fallen significantly during the past year, it is highly possible that the housing costs now are still higher than the average of the country or its neighboring towns. Further, although the real estate taxes remain lower, we don't know whether other taxes have risen or fallen. The expenditure in a town is consists of all kinds of factors, for example, the prices of commodities, the fee of transportations, and besides the estate taxes, there are more other taxes to pay. Without considering all these relative costs, only the fallen housing costs and lower estate taxes are not sufficient to prove the costs living in CV is low.

In the second place, the arguer fails to provide evidence concerning the present conditions of schools, streets, and public services. Moreover, the arguer doesn't present the concrete plans to conduct these programs. It might be the case that the conditions are so poor that these programs will take a long time to finish, and the new residents cannot enjoy these services for quite a few years. Further, the fix of the streets or public services may cause a lot of other problems, the traffic may be affected and there may be a lot of noise. For the retirees who want a convenient and quiet place to live, these problems are not acceptable.

Last but not least, the arguer fails to prove that CV has an excellent healthy system. Without mentioning the population of CV, the number of physicians cannot show that CV has enough physicians. Moreover, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the quality of health care and the amount of physicians. Even if CV has a lot of physicians, it doesn't mean that CV's health care system is favorable. It is entirely possible that a large number of physicians of CV are not very competent, or the equipment in the hospitals are not very advanced. Without ruling out all these alternatives, the arguer unconvincingly concludes that retires in CV will receive excellent health care.

In conclusion, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the living costs in CV is lower than the neighboring areas. Additionally, the arguer must provide evidence concerning the plans of the measures to improve the schools, the streets and the services. The arguer also needs to consider other factors of the health system to show CV's ability to provide excellent health care for retirees.

lulu花开UID: 2351079

In this argument, the arguer recommends that retirees should choose Clearview(CV) as their place to retire. To substantiate his claim, the arguer provides evidence that the housing costs in CV is low and the health care is excellent. The arguer also cites the mayor's promise that many new programs will be conducted in CV to improve schools, streets and public services. A careful examination will reveal how groundless this argument is.(新东方毫无意义的八卦式开头，虽然有自己的模板)

In the first place, the arguer fails to convince us that the housing costs in CV are low. Although the arguer claims that the housing costs in CV have fallen significantly during the past year, it is highly possible that the housing costs now are still higher than the average of the country or its neighboring towns. Further, although the real estate taxes remain lower, we don't know whether other taxes have risen or fallen. The expenditure in a town is consists of all kinds of factors, for example, the prices of commodities, the fee of transportations, and besides the estate taxes, there are more other taxes to pay. Without considering all these relative costs, only the fallen housing costs and lower estate taxes are not sufficient to prove the costs living in CV is low.

In the second place, the arguer fails to provide evidence concerning the present conditions of schools, streets, and public services. Moreover, the arguer doesn't present the concrete plans to conduct these programs. It might be the case that the conditions are so poor that these programs will take a long time to finish, and the new residents cannot enjoy these services for quite a few years. Further, the fix of the streets or public services may cause a lot of other problems, the traffic may be affected and there may be a lot of noise. For the retirees who want a convenient and quiet place to live, these problems are not acceptable.

Last but not least, the arguer fails to prove that CV has an excellent healthy system. Without mentioning the population of CV, the number of physicians cannot show that CV has enough physicians. Moreover, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the quality of health care and the amount of physicians. Even if CV has a lot of physicians, it doesn't mean that CV's health care system is favorable. It is entirely possible that a large number of physicians of CV are not very competent, or the equipment in the hospitals are not very advanced. Without ruling out all these alternatives, the arguer unconvincingly concludes that retires in CV will receive excellent health care.

In conclusion, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the living costs in CV is lower than the neighboring areas. Additionally, the arguer must provide evidence concerning the plans of the measures to improve the schools, the streets and the services. The arguer also needs to consider other factors of the health system to show CV's ability to provide excellent health care for retirees.（新东方八卦式结尾）

我觉得整体论证和结构还是可以的，语言也可以，简单也很清晰。但是这篇文章模板的痕迹太重了，不好，论证的再完整也不一定能得高分！

[ 本帖最后由 lulu花开 于 2007-7-14 14:01 编辑 ]