argument7 [0710G 戴三个表冲刺小组] 第2次作业

goo1goo2UID: 2331628

7.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview
newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann
Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank
Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members
are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the
number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have
increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients
with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental
problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."



In the letter the arguer recommonds voting for Ann Green rather than Frank Brown in the coming mayoral election. To support his recommondation the arguer cites that the number of factories has a significant increase  and more patients are treated with respiratory illness. Considering these facts, the arguer asserts that the environmental problems in Clearview will be solved by Ann Green. I find this argument logically unconvincing in several aspects.
      First of all,the incerease of factoris doesn't necessarily lead to air pollution. On the contrary ,if the new factories are some kinds of rubbish disposal company,water refinerary manufacturers,they can protect the environment rather than pollute. Moreover,there might be many other reasons for air pollution. For example,the gas discharged by  cars may do a lot of harm to the air.
      As for the incerease of patients with repiratory illness,the arguer doesn't provide with more detailed information to convince me. For one thing,we don't know the increase of 25% is compared with what:another city,the historical statistics or any other references. For another,there is no evidence showing that the air pollution results in the respiratory illness. In fact,the weather,especially a cold winter, can be one of the most imprtant reason.
      Finally,even if Ann Green becamoes the mayoral,whether the environmental problemcan be solved is still unknown. The arguer provides no evidence that what Ann Green has done to improve the environment before, and therefore,we can't make a grrounless conclusion. Furthermore,the mayoral's work can be limited by othe realistic factors, like the fund and the policy.
      In sum,the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To call for more residents voting for Ann Green,the arguer must rule out all other possible reasons for the air pollution during the current menbers'manipulation. The arguer would also bolster the argument by providing reliable evidence that Ann Green can do much better than Frank Brown in solving the enviromental problems.