Argument2[AWER小组]

houyanchunUID: 2432949

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."


In this argument, the author claims that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, the dwellers should adopt the same method of restriction on landscaping and house painting as Brookville's. To support his conclusion, the author provides that average property values in Brookville have tripled since they adopt above method. The claim is seemed reasonable at first sight, but there are crucial fallacies by consideration carefully.

First of all, the situation would be different at present from seven years ago. It is very possible that the method which has produced good effect could not bring anticipated results for the state and environment have changed a lot comparing to before. The author fails to consider this point so that we can not be convince to agree with the author's conclusion.

Secondly, the various conditions in Deerhaven Acres such as geographic environment and so forth are not consent with Brookville. It is entire possible that same the methods could not produce desired effect for Deerhaven Acres though they are successful in Brookville due to different exterior conditions. Without offering relative evidences to explain whether special conditions of two places are similar or not, the conclusion is poor credible.

Thirdly, the author fails to establish a necessary causal relation between the method of house painting and landscape and the increased property. There are alternatives for the property prompting, for example the assiduity of the people in Brookville and new machines and regulations are introduced to improve the quality of farm produce so that attracting a great number of businessmen to prearrange goods even though they can not adopt a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted.  Without ruling out these alternatives, the conclusion is not validated simply.

In order to convince us that the conclusion is credible, the author should provide more evidences to explain that special conditions in two places are identical and the situation have not changed compared to seven years ago. Furthermore, the author should offer more compelling evidences to indicate that the causal relation that the adopted method and the increased property conserves believing.

[ 本帖最后由 houyanchun 于 2007-12-21 13:24 编辑 ]

lw19851028UID: 2438560

In this argument, the author claims that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, the dwellers should adopt the same method of restriction on landscaping and house painting as Brookville's. To support his conclusion, the author provides that average property values in Brookville have tripled since they adopt above method. The claim is（去掉） seemed reasonable at first sight, but there are（it is） crucial fallacies by consideration carefully.

First of all, the situation would be different at present from seven years ago. It is very possible that the method which has produced good effect could not bring anticipated results for the state and environment have changed a lot comparing to before. The author fails to consider this point so that we can not be convince(convinced) to agree with the author's conclusion.

Secondly, the various conditions in Deerhaven Acres such as geographic environment and so forth are not consent with Brookville. It is entire possible that same the methods could not produce desired effect for Deerhaven Acres though they are successful in Brookville due to different exterior conditions. Without offering relative evidences to explain whether special conditions of two places are similar or not, the conclusion is poor credible.

Thirdly, the author fails to establish a necessary causal relation between the method of house painting and landscape and the increased property. There are alternatives for the property prompting, for example the assiduity of the people in Brookville and new machines and regulations are introduced to improve the quality of farm produce so that attracting a great number of businessmen to prearrange goods even though they can not adopt a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted.  Without ruling out these alternatives, the conclusion is not validated simply.

In order to convince us that the conclusion is credible, the author should provide more evidences to explain that special conditions in two places are identical and the situation have not changed compared to seven years ago. Furthermore, the author should offer more compelling evidences to indicate that the causal relation that the adopted method and the increased property conserves believing.

well done!
第一点和第二点略显单薄了点，可以再补充点内容。