argument144 [0710G 戴三个表冲刺小组] 第3次作业

goo1goo2UID: 2331628

144According to a poll of 200 charitable organizations, donations of money to nonprofit groups increased by nearly 25 percent last year, though not all charities gained equally. Religious groups gained the most (30 percent), followed by environmental groups (23 percent), whereas educational institutions experienced only a very small increase in donations (3 percent). This poll indicates that more people are willing and able to give money to charities but that funding for education is not a priority for most people. These differences in donation rates must result from the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions.



This argument concludes that the differences in donation increase rates result from the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions. The arguer bases the conclusion on a poll of 200 charitible organizations,which indicates that more donations are gave to charities lide religious and environmental groups but that funding for education is not a priority for most people. The conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis doesn't lend strong support to what the arguer maintains.
      In the first place,the statistical evidence of the poll comes from only 200 charitable organizations,so it can't always reflect the whole. If the poll ust consists of only a few educational institutions with less donation,without others with much ore donation,the statistic must bave bias. Only the arguer shows that the sample of charitable organization is representative and large enough,can we think of the statistical significant and unbiased.
      In the second place,it's entirely possible that most of donations educational organizations received is not from charitable organizations---national donation and company donation are also forms of donation. Besides,many rich men donates the money to schools directly,not through charitable organizations. Correspondingly,the proportion of donations greatly decrease the money they received,and therefore it takes on the misleading appearance that funding for education is not a priority for most people. Thearguer establish his assumption that charitable organizations receives all the donation for education,which is groundless and totally flawed.
      Finally,different people hold different views toward charity. Some people are willing to contribute to religious cause,some tend to donate for environmental protection,while others may be more interested in educational cause. People's interest plays a critical part in their donation,thus,I can't concede that the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions results in the differences in donation rates. This perception can afflunce the differences in some degree,but we can't ignore other possible factors.
      To sum up,all the evidence  discussed above analysis supports my conclusin that the argument depends on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands. To make it more compelling,the arguer must guarantee the statistical evidence is credible. It's also essential for the arguer to have a deeper consideration into other factors which may afflunce the result.