Argument2 【0710G-小猪快跑小组】第6次作业 By freckle

frecklewang1984UID: 2355474

Argument 2
2.The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
字数：421
Concerning homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the yards in the community were landscaped and painting colors in the exteriors, before average property values had tripled there seven years ago, the arguer concludes that they , all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres, should follow their own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting to raise property values. However, hastily judged, the argument is unwarranted.

To begin with, the arguer is failing to consider other possible possibilities to the tripling average property values in Brookville. It is possible that attractive, appetizing commercials aimed intentionally to generate a competitive atmosphere for property value in Brookville, and consequently tripled average property values. Or with appealing potentials in economy or tourism, more numbers of employees and high-profit individuals are disposed to inhabit Brookville, more job opportunity, more convenient traffic and more satisfactory health service, more comfortable climate. Or the location of Brookville, pivotally cultural and industrial center, stands out from other cities. The arguer can not ignore other possibilities for the tripling average property values in Brookville.

In addition, over seven years, there may be sharp contrast to the past. Individuals who are preparing for purchasing or renting probably focus on accommodating household electric appliance, local safety circumstance, reasonable prices to provide, and convenience for every-use articles and etc. How the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted is likely to just a modicum of consideration, even absolute negligence. The arguer does not provide adequate evidences to demonstrate that criteria residents adopt always adhere to landscaping and housepainting, and therefore unpersuasive.

Finally, even though the two facets above are admitted, there is no evidence to confirm that restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in Deerhaven Acres also function to raise property values in terms of different regional characteristic. Perhaps residents in Deerhaven Acre have acclimated present landscaping and housepainting, and if rigid restrictions opinionatedly are carried out without agreement in inhabitants, it would incur the opposite in all likely hood. Moreover, large numbers of alternatives may arrive better for raising property values in Deerhaven Acres, rather than the restrictions on landscaping and housepainting, such as competing price, suitable accommodation and service. The arguer provides too meager evidences to support the argument.
To sum, the arguer is unconvincing just relying on the presented above. To embrace the argument, the arguer must eliminate any other alternatives to tripling average property values in Brookville. In addition, the arguer also provides sufficient evidence to validate the conclusion.