argument234

katu1204UID: 2355887

The conclusion of the arguer in the argument is that people seeking healthier and longer lives shuold consider moving to small communities.  To justify the conclusion the author points out that fewer days of leave days are taken by individual workers in the small town of Leeville than in the large city of Mason City, along with the fact that proportion of physicians to residents in Mason is five times as high as that in Leeville. Furthermore, the arguer indicates that the average age of Leeville residents is higher than that of Mason City residents. But through in-depth analysis, we may find that the argument contains several facets that are questionable.

To begin with, the comparison on the incidence of sick leave of the two towns is not enough to support the recommendation. It is entirely possible that the employees in Leeville persist working even when they are sick in order to earn more money, or that more workers in Mason goldbrick. If that is the case, Leeville employees may out of condition due to continuous working while Mason employees are in condition owing to sufficient rest. Moreover, without showing that the amounts of employees are similar in two towns, the arguer cannot draw any conclusion on the basies of the comparison.

Secondly, we are informed that the proportion of physicians to residents is higher than that of Leeville. However, numbers of possibilities besides the residents' health might explain the contrast. For instance, Mason's finance are sound and appeal to more physicians, it is equally possible that people preper to large cities such as Mason for physician visits. Without ruling out these factors, the arguer cannot justify the conclusion that the size of the town affects people's health.

In addition, the arguer implies the correlation between better healthy and higher average age is a casual relationship. But the arguer ignores the possibilities that Leevile's residents are almost retired old men, while the residents in Mason are almost young men who are engaged in working. In order to better testify the recommendation, the arguer is supposed to show the comparison on life expectation of tow towns' residents.

Finally, even if residents in Leeville are healthier than Mason's residents, the recommendation that is the size of town that impact on health is still questionable. Maybe Leeville's residents who care more about their health take more exercises and pay more attention to healthy food. Besides, the arguer fails to provide assurances that the residents and the size of these two towns are representative of others. Thus further investigation and more evidences are needed before the ultimate suggestion.

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make the view more reasonable, the arguer should provide the evidence that the residents in Leeville are healthier than that of Mason and why. In addition, more information, such as why Mason’s physicians are more than Leeville’s, the disparity of life expectation of tow towns’ residents should also be provided.

cacipolarUID: 2186882

本来改了一处可惜是打错了，楼主已经没有必要再写ARGU了。惭愧，真是只能望其项背了

bigyanUID: 2382427

The conclusion of the arguer in the argument is that people seeking healthier and longer lives shuold consider moving to small communities.  To justify the conclusion the author points out that fewer days of leave days are taken by individual workers in the small town of Leeville than in the large city of Mason City, along with the fact that proportion of physicians to residents in Mason is five times as high as that in Leeville. Furthermore, the arguer indicates that the average age of Leeville residents is higher than that of Mason City residents. But through in-depth analysis, we may find that the argument contains several facets that are questionable.

To begin with, the comparison on the incidence of sick leave of the two towns is not enough to support the recommendation. It is entirely possible that the employees in Leeville persist working even when they are sick in order to earn more money, or that more workers in Mason goldbrick. If that is the case, Leeville employees may out of condition due to continuous working while Mason employees are in condition owing to sufficient rest. Moreover, without showing that the amounts of employees are similar in two towns, the arguer cannot draw any conclusion on the basies of the comparison.

Secondly, we are informed that the proportion of physicians to residents is higher than that of Leeville. However, numbers of possibilities besides the residents' health might explain the contrast. For instance, Mason's finance are sound and appeal to more physicians, it is equally possible that people preper to large cities such as Mason for physician visits. Without ruling out these factors, the arguer cannot justify the conclusion that the size of the town affects people's health.

In addition, the arguer implies the correlation between better healthy and higher average age is a casual relationship. But the arguer ignores the possibilities that Leevile's residents are almost retired old men, while the residents in Mason are almost young men who are engaged in working. In order to better testify the recommendation, the arguer is supposed to show the comparison on life expectation of tow towns' residents.

Finally, even if residents in Leeville are healthier than Mason's residents, the recommendation that is the size of town that impact on health is still questionable. Maybe Leeville's residents who care more about their health take more exercises and pay more attention to healthy food. Besides, the arguer fails to provide assurances that the residents and the size of these two towns are representative of others. Thus further investigation and more evidences are needed before the ultimate suggestion.

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make the view more reasonable, the arguer should provide the evidence that the residents in Leeville are healthier than that of Mason and why. In addition, more information, such as why Mason’s physicians are more than Leeville’s, the disparity of life expectation of tow towns’ residents should also be provided
作者的文章已然相当成熟，思路也很清晰，实在找不出来什么问题，不知是不是在规定时间内完成的。