argument25 欢迎拍砖！

zoe797970UID: 2249886

The claim that Hopewell (H) should build a golf course and resort hotel similar to the Ocean View (OV) in order to improve H's economy and generate additional tax revenues seems somewhat reasonable at first glance. After all, the arguer does offer some relevant evidence, and the assumptions weakening this argument are not without any merit. However, three important concerns he/she ignores to take into account may undermine the argument seriously.

In the first place, lacking more specific information about the reasons why Ov's tax revenues have risen, it is impossible to make an informed conclusion. He/she ignores some other factors--such as the improvement of environment, inrush of a large number of people and new effective government economic polices-- which may be more important in determining the increase of tax revenues of the OV town. Meanwhile, enormous reasons can lead to the flourish tourism. An introduction of a kind of precious animal, a meteorite had fell down to this town, even news that an ET had paid a visit there; all could be the perfect reasons. Any of the above scenarios, if true, would render the arguer's analysis a completely false one.

In the second place, the arguer commits a fallacy of false analogy. Supposed that the golf course and resort hotel did lead to the tax revenues increase in OV, there is no sufficient evidence to convince us they would have the similar effects in H town. Maybe the residents living in H town are poorer and obviously cannot afford such leisure as golf games-- a typical privileged or rich class's game. Maybe the transportation in H town is worse than OV; consequently, people would have to spend plenty of time in driving and intend not to go there anymore after they have paid first visit. In a word, the problem is that the arguer doesn't cite sufficient evidence to support and justify his/her analogical deduction.

What further weakens the argument is without other important concerns related to the psychology of the consumers; we cannot accept the arguer's recommendation. Granted the other circumstances of the two towns are basically similar to each other, there is no need for the council of H town to build up a golf course and resort hotel as the OV. For one thing, people may have got used to the OV's golf course, and then the new course in H town would have to spend tremendous money and efforts on the advertisement to attract customers. For another thing, the fames and styles are also determinate when people choose a hotel. A failure in the design of the hotel can absolutely ruin all of other efforts.

As it stands, the argument suffers from three critical flaws. To strengthen it, the arguer would have to demonstrate those measures taken in OV did led to the increase of tax revenues. Furthermore, he/she must provide credible and acceptable evidence to rule out all the above-mentioned possibilities that might undermine the argument.

PandeamoniumUID: 2303806

The claim that Hopewell (H) should build a golf course and resort hotel similar to the Ocean View (OV) in order to improve H's economy and generate additional tax revenues seems somewhat reasonable at first glance. After all, the arguer does offer some relevant evidence, and the assumptions weakening this argument are not without any merit. However, three important concerns he/she ignores to take into account may undermine the argument seriously.我觉得第一段的模版不错
In the first place, lacking more specific information about the reasons why Ov's tax revenues have risen, it is impossible to make an informed conclusion. He/she ignores some other factors--such as the improvement of environment, inrush of a large number of people and new effective government economic polices-- which may be more important in determining the increase of tax revenues of the OV town. Meanwhile, enormous reasons can lead to the flourish tourism. An introduction of a kind of precious animal, a meteorite had fell down to this town, even news that an ET had paid a visit there; all could be the perfect reasons. Any of the above scenarios, if true, would render the arguer's analysis a completely false one.
In the second place, the arguer commits a fallacy of false analogy.有这样的用法吗:commit a fallacy of,如果有的话收下了Supposed that the golf course and resort hotel did lead to the tax revenues increase in OV, there is no sufficient evidence to convince us they would have the similar effects in H town. Maybe the residents living in H town are poorer and obviously cannot afford such leisure as golf games-- a typical privileged or rich class's game. Maybe the transportation in H town is worse than OV; consequently, people would have to spend plenty of time in driving and intend not to go there anymore after they have paid first visit. In a word, the problem is that the arguer doesn't cite sufficient evidence to support and justify his/her analogical deduction.
What further weakens the argument is without other important concerns related to the psychology of the consumers; we cannot accept the arguer's recommendation. Granted the other circumstances of the two towns are basically similar to each other, there is no need for the council这个词可以代替政府部门的意思吗 of H town to build up a golf course and resort hotel as the OV.(1) For one thing, people may have got used to the OV's golf course, and then the new course in H town would have to spend tremendous money and efforts on the advertisement to attract customers. For another thing, the fames and styles are also determinatedeterminated when people choose a hotel. A failure in the design of the hotel can absolutely ruin all of other efforts.这段ts的意思是:没有另外的对消费者心理因素的关注,我们不能接受论断者的建议.接着你说没有必要建,有两点原因: (1)从球场来看我认为还可以,但从酒店来看,我觉得这个理由也可以适用于高尔夫球场.

As it stands, the argument suffers from three critical flaws.遭受缺点?不好吧:改成exist To strengthen it,加强?应该是改正吧straighten up,因为我觉得这里的it指的是缺点 the arguer would have to demonstrate those measures taken in OV did led to the increase of tax revenues. Furthermore, he/she must provide credible and acceptable evidence to rule out all the above-mentioned possibilities that might undermine the argument.
根据新东方教我们的方法,我认为还有两个点可以找  一个是关于30%的,另外一个是关于best的. 30%:可以说即使ov提高了30%也没有H原来的golf钱来的多; best:论断没有提供证据比别的什么方法强,强在哪里

zoe797970UID: 2249886

1.commit a fallacy of是在孙远写作上看到的，应该是有吧
2.council 在这个地方指的是这个镇的相关委员会，可能是这段时间阿狗看多了吧，很多地方都会说到council怎么怎么样，所以在这篇阿狗里即使没有提到，我还是惯性的使用了。。。
3.这个我确实在表达上不知道怎么说了，唉，每次遇到这种实际上的东西我都觉得很难去表达。。。
4.这句话也是 在那本书上的孙远工具箱里弄的。。。
5.同上
6.从30%和best下手真的很好啊！我怎么就没有想到啊。。。呵呵，多谢啦！！！