Argument67 [Victors小组]2I1A互改

njuzhshaoUID??2258118

题目：ARGUMENT67 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a newspaper serving the villages of Castorville and Polluxton.
"Both the villages of Castorville and Polluxton have experienced sharp declines in the numbers of residents who pay property taxes. To save money and improve service, the two villages recently merged their once separate garbage collection departments into a single department located in Castorville, and the new department has reported few complaints about its service. Last year the library in Polluxton had 20 percent fewer users than during the previous year. It follows that we should now further economize and improve service, as we did with garbage collection, by closing the library in Polluxton and using the library in Castorville to serve both villages."


In the argument, the author concludes that library in Polluxton and in Castorville should be merged, and use only the library in Castorville to serve both villages can further economize and improve service. To support this conclusion, the author points out that after they merged their separate garbage collection departments of two village into a single one in Castorville last year, few complaints have been recieved. The author then reasons that facing the 20 percents decrease of the library users in Polluxton, the merge of libraries will achieve the same success as the garbages. Several critical fallacies lie in this argument.

First, the author provide no strong evidence to justify that conclusion that merging garbages of two villiages into a single one in Castorville does further economize and improve service, as the author suggests in the analogy. The author unwarrentedly assumes that the decrease of number of garbages is sure to bring curtailment in cost. However, the author fails to take into account the cost cause by a increasing of average distance between garbage collection station and villagers which cost more in transports. Neither does he\she mentions the number of complaints received years ago to give a comparison with the statistic last year, when he gets to the not well-justified assertion that services are improved. 作者认为garbage减少必然缩减成本、garbage投诉少必然服务好都是不严密的。

Second, the argument fails to prove the necessary of merging libraries. By presenting a 20 percent decrease of the library users in Polluxton, the author implies that the total users of the two village libraries are lessen. However, there is a good chance that Castorville enlarged their library and provided more useful resources or more comfortable environment which appealed to a large amount of Polluxton's readers. In this case, the total number of users in the two village has equal possibility to increase. It would be more persuasive for the author to show the relevent statistics which inform readers the total number of users.作者认为P村20%的缩减提供了合并的必然性，其实也有可能是C村得好了，都跑去了。

Third, the positive expectation of the merging action is based on a false analogy. Though both garbages and libraries are public establishments, they are completely different in their ways of providing services to villagers, and their costs also have distinct factors. For example, where the garbage collection lies may be unsensible to villagers for that they may only need to put garbages in the front of their door; while the location of a library may largely influence their interests in reading. In this sense, it is too easy to get to the conclusion that merging the libraries can gain the similar goods as author advocates.错误类比，垃圾场和图书馆毕竟还是不一样的。

In conclusion, the arguer fails to concern us of the rationality of merging the libraries, neither does he\she prove the inevitability of economical benefits and service improvement of the action. To better judge whether we should merge the two libraries, we should need a more complete consideration.

[ 本帖最后由 njuzhshao 于 2007-7-23 23:08 编辑 ]

乳虎UID??2251211

In the argument, the author concludes that library in Polluxton and in Castorville should be merged, and use only the library in Castorville to serve both villages can further economize and improve service. To support this conclusion, the author points out that after they merged their separate garbage collection departments of two village into a single one in Castorville last year, few complaints have been recieved.[receive]  The author then reasons that facing the 20 percents decrease of the library users in Polluxton, the merge of libraries will achieve the same success as the garbages. Several critical fallacies lie in this argument.

First, the author provide  no strong evidence to justify that conclusion that merging garbages of two villiages into a single one in Castorville does further economize and improve service, as the author suggests in the analogy. The author unwarrantedly assumes that the decrease of number of garbages is sure to bring curtailment in cost. However, the author fails to take into account the cost cause by a increasing of average distance between garbage collection station and villagers which cost more in transports. Neither does he\she mentions the number of complaints received years ago to give a comparison with the statistic last year, when he gets to the not well-justified assertion that services are improved.[有必要给出基数来吗？fewer就足够了] 作者认为garbage减少必然缩减成本、garbage投诉少必然服务好都是不严密的。

Second, the argument fails to prove the necessary of merging libraries. By presenting a 20 percent decrease of the library users in Polluxton, the author implies that the total users of the two village libraries are lessen. However, there is a good chance that Castorville enlarged their library and provided more useful resources or more comfortable environment which appealed to a large amount of Polluxton's readers. In this case, the total number of users in the two village has equal possibility to increase. It would be more persuasive for the author to show the relevant  statistics which inform readers the total number of users.作者认为P村20%的缩减提供了合并的必然性，其实也有可能是C村得好了，都跑去了。

Third, the positive expectation of the merging action is based on a false analogy. Though both garbages and libraries are public establishments, they are completely different in their ways of providing services to villagers, and their costs also have distinct factors. For example, where the garbage collection lies may be unsensible to villagers for that they may only need to put garbages in the front of their door; while the location of a library may largely influence their interests in reading. In this sense, it is too easy[hasty] to get to the conclusion that merging the libraries can gain the similar goods[benefit] as author advocates.错误类比，垃圾场和图书馆毕竟还是不一样的。

In conclusion, the arguer fails to concern us of [inform] the rationality of merging the libraries, neither does he\she prove the inevitability of economical benefits and service improvement of the action. To better judge whether we should merge the two libraries, we should need a more complete consideration

[没有什么大问题，改进语言就好了。]

njuzhshaoUID??2258118

实际上题目里没有说fewer只说了few所以才提的^_^