argument164 第34次作业(模考5) 请大家拍拍

pinuoUID: 2328081

TOPIC: ARGUMENT164 - Claitown University needs both affordable housing for its students and a way to fund the building of such housing. The best solution to this problem is to commission a famous architect known for experimental and futuristic buildings. It is common knowledge that tourists are willing to pay money to tour some of the architect's buildings, so it can be expected that tourists will want to visit this new building. The income from the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs. Furthermore, such a building will attract new students as well as donations from alumni. And even though such a building will be much larger than our current need for student housing, part of the building can be used as office space.
WORDS: 474          TIME: 00:29:46          DATE: 2007-8-31 17:39:25

The author, in the argument recommends commissioning a famous architect know for experimental and futuristic buildings as a method to solve the problem of affordable housing for students and fund building. The argument is problematic in several aspects, thus render it is unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author assumes the tourists will be interested in the building and want to visit the new building, but fails to substantiate this assumption. After all, assuming the domatry be the target of tourism is still a little unreasonable. Suppose what the university would be if there are lots of tourist visits here, how can the students concentrate on their study. And there are always some undirable things happen in the tourism, because the tourists generally come from different areas or even different nations and their backgoud is hare to be tracked. the worst thing is crime which the university cannot afford. Even the less serious thing will definitly place infliction on the university. Thus place the order into risk mere in order to earn some income is quite unresonable.

In addition, even I were convinced that there are some tourisits will visists the universty and will not affect the study of students and the work of faulty. The author's argument that the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs is remain uncertain. Because the author provide absolute no evidence how much the building will cost and how much the tourists fee will be. It is highly possible the author is a little optimistic because it will cost so much to build such building that the fee from tourists cannot cover this cost. We can suppose, the university cannot charge to much for the people who visit a building in university, which make it need a long time--perhaps far beyond our imagination or patient--to receive enough money to cover the cost.

Finally, author fails to prove the cause--and--effect relationship between new building and attracting new students and donations. Common sense tells us the factors that a student choose a university or alumni decide to donate is the reputation, acdemic powers, the education atmosphere and the like rather than the building of universtiy which merely serve as a ostensible symbal. And the author's further suggestion that use part of the building as office space is not a wise idea, because it will make the life of students and the work of teacher inconvenient.

In sum, to convince me that it is a reasonable decision, the author need provide evidenct that the new building will be the target of tourists and the fee charged can soon cover the building cost. To better assess the recommendation, I need the evidence that the new student will be more like to study in our universtity and we can receive more donation because of the  new building .

pinuoUID: 2328081

The author, in the argument, recommends to commission a famous architect know for experimental and futuristic buildings as a method to solve the problem of affordable housing for students and fund building. The argument is problematic in several aspects, thus render it is unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author assumes the tourists will be interested in the building and want to visit the new building, but fails to substantiate this assumption. After all, assuming the dormitory to be the target of tourism is still a little unreasonable. Suppose what the university would be like if there are lots of tourist visits here, how can the students concentrate on their study. And there are always some undesirable things happen in the tourism, because the tourists generally come from different areas or even different nations and their background is hare to be tracked, the worst thing is crime which will be extremely dangerous for the university. Even the less serious thing will definitely cause the damage inflicted on the university. Thus placing the school order into risk merely in order to earn some income is quite unacceptable.

In addition, even if I were to concede that there were some tourists would visit the university and not would affect the study of students and the work of faulty. The author's argument that the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs remains uncertain. Because the author provide absolute no evidence how much the building will cost and how much the fee will be. It is highly possible the author is a little optimistic because it will cost so much to build such building that the fee from tourists cannot cover this cost. Perhaps, the university cannot charge too much for the people who visit a building in university, which make it need a long time--perhaps far beyond our imagination or university’s expectation--to receive enough money to cover the cost.

Finally, author fails to prove the cause-and-effect relationship between new building and attracting new students and donations. Common sense tells us the factors that being taken into consideration when a student choose a university or alumni decide to donate is the reputation, academic powers, the education atmosphere and the like rather than the building of university which merely serve as a ostensible symbol. And the author's further suggestion that use part of the building as office space is not a wise idea, because it will make the life of students and the work of teacher inconvenient.

In sum, to convince me that it is a reasonable decision, the author need provide evidence that the new building will be the target of tourists and the fee charged from tourists can soon cover the building cost. To better assess the recommendation, I need the evidence that the new student will be more like to study in our university and we can receive more donation because of the new building.