ARGUMENT234 [Aero小组第三次作业] by liuyingbnu

ragingfireUID: 186932

The author highly recommends that people in pursuit of both longer and healthier lives should moving to small communities, simply for the assuming that it is the life style there that contributes to long and health life. To support his claim, following evidence are cited in this article: (1) businessmen in Leeville tend to report fewer days of sick leave than those in Mason City(MC), (2) the proportion of physicians to residents in Leeville is as one fifth as that in MC, (3) the average age of people in Leeville are "significantly" higher. Tempting as such a claim might be, close examination reveals that, however, these facts insufficiently lend credence to his claim.
The threshold assumption of such an argument is that people living Leeville are less likely to be infected by diseases, but the author fails to support it with adequate information. The mere fact that fewer days of sick leave are taken by residents working in business in Leeville contributes little to substantiate the assertion. Perhaps workers in Leeville feel obliged to go to work, for the schedule set by the supervisor are rather tight, and if they take leaves because of falling sick, they probably will suffer from remedy. In this case, we could visualize that the workers with fevers attend the work as usual. Further, there are great opportunities that people working in business field in Leeville are both young and strong, in the primitive time in their life, while in MC, it is just the opposite picture. If this is the case, there is no wonder that more days of sick leave are asked in MC.
Secondly, the author tend to hold the assertion that residents in MC call for much more medical care than those in Leeville, however, it is not necessarily the case. It is quite possible that due to finance limitation, hospitals in Leeville seldom can afford more expenses on employing promising doctors, while on the other side, competent doctors abounds in MC's hospitals for they can provide considerable salary and advanced research equipment. Other than that, residents in Leeville are not restricted to attain medical care in local hospitals. Commonsense tells us the residents in small towns go out of their ways to big cities with hope of getting advanced medical treatments when having severe diseases and resort to local hospitals when catching a cold. Without evidence that the hospitals in MC are accessible only to its residents, the argument can never be compelling.
Thirdly, the author strongly emphasizes the average age in Leeville is "significantly" higher than that in MC. The vague statement, without substantiated statistics, which I take leave to doubt, lends little support to the argument. Probably, the majority of the city residents are very young or even there are more new babies. However the old feeling like peaceful life out of the chaos move to the nearby countryside. Under this circumstances, the conclusion that people in Leeville survive a longer life than those in MC deserve more consideration.
Finally, even assuming that residents in Leeville do live a healthier and longer life than their neighbors in MC, the author commits a fallacy of hasty generation. Without clear evidence that the very places mentioned above are typical of the small towns and its counterpart-big cities. The author fails to rule out the possibility that such phenomena in these two places are exceptional for the whole situation.
To sum up, without clear evidence that people in Leeville lead a longer and healthier life than those in MC, without pointing out that the two places are  representative of countryside and big cities, the proposal raise by the author are still doubtful as it stands.

houyanchunUID: 2432949

ARGUMENT234 [Aero小组第三次作业] by liuyingbnu
The author highly recommends that people in pursuit of both longer and healthier lives should moving to small communities, simply for the assuming that it is the life style there that contributes to long and health life. To support his claim, following evidence are cited in this article: (1) businessmen in Leeville tend to report fewer days of sick leave than those in Mason City(MC), (2) the proportion of physicians to residents in Leeville is as one fifth as that in MC, (3) the average age of people in Leeville are "significantly" higher. Tempting as such a claim might be, close examination reveals that, however, these facts insufficiently lend credence to his claim.
The threshold assumption of such an argument is that people living (in) Leeville are less likely to be infected by diseases, but the author fails to support it with adequate information. The mere fact that fewer days of sick leave are taken by residents working in business in Leeville contributes little to substantiate the assertion. Perhaps workers in Leeville feel obliged to go to work, for the schedule set by the supervisor are rather tight, and if they take leaves because of falling sick, they probably will suffer from remedy. In this case, we could visualize that the workers with fevers attend the work as usual. Further, there are great opportunities that people working in business field in Leeville are both young and strong, in the primitive time in their life, while in MC, it is just the opposite picture. If this is the case, there is no wonder that more days of sick leave are asked in MC.
Secondly, the author tend to hold the assertion that residents in MC call for much more medical care than those in Leeville, however, it is not necessarily the case. It is quite possible that due to finance limitation, hospitals in Leeville seldom can afford more expenses on employing promising doctors, while on the other side, competent doctors abounds in MC's hospitals for they can provide considerable salary and advanced research equipment. Other than that, residents in Leeville are not restricted to attain medical care in local hospitals. Commonsense tells us the residents in small towns go out of their ways to big cities with hope of getting advanced medical treatments when having severe diseases and resort to local hospitals when catching a cold. Without evidence that the hospitals in MC are accessible only to its residents, the argument can never be compelling.
Thirdly, the author strongly emphasizes the average age in Leeville is "significantly" higher than that in MC. The vague statement, without substantiated statistics, which I take leave to doubt, lends little support to the argument. Probably, the majority of the city residents are very young or even there are more new babies. However the old feeling like（desiring for） peaceful life out of the chaos move to the nearby countryside. Under this circumstances, the conclusion that people in Leeville survive a longer life than those in MC deserve more consideration.
Finally, even assuming that residents in Leeville do live a healthier and longer life than their neighbors in MC, the author commits a fallacy of hasty generation. Without clear evidence that the very places mentioned above are typical of the small towns and its counterpart-big cities. The author fails to rule out the possibility that such phenomena in these two places are exceptional for the whole situation.
To sum up, without clear evidence that people in Leeville lead a longer and healthier life than those in MC, without pointing out that the two places are  representative of countryside and big cities, the proposal raise by the author are still doubtful as it stands.
写的很棒呀，加油，羡慕中。呵呵，用词多样，句式多变。

sheldenUID: 2338299

The author highly recommends that people in pursuit of both longer and healthier lives should moving to small communities, simply for the assuming（assumption 楼主用的词解释为“傲慢的”） that it is the life style there that contributes to long and health life.To support his claim, following evidence are cited in this article: (1) businessmen in Leeville tend to report fewer days of sick leave than those in Mason City(MC), (2) the proportion of physicians to residents in Leeville is as one fifth as that in MC, (3) the average age of people in Leeville are "significantly" higher. Tempting as such a claim might be（很可爱的倒状：））, close examination reveals that, however, these facts insufficiently lend credence to his claim.

The threshold assumption of such an argument is that people living Leeville are less likely to be infected by diseases, but the author fails to support it with adequate information. The mere fact that fewer days of sick leave are taken by residents working in business in Leeville contributes little to substantiate the assertion. （哎  致命错误  LEEVILLE的对比对象是工人  not in business）Perhaps workers in Leeville feel obliged to go to work, for the schedule(s) set by the supervisor are rather tight, and if they take leaves because of falling sick, they probably will suffer from remedy.(suffer from 后面应该加负面事物 句子意思不太清楚) In this case, we could visualize that the workers with fevers attend the work as usual. Further, there are great opportunities that people working in business field in Leeville are both young and strong, in the primitive time in their life, while in MC, it is just the opposite picture. If this is the case, there is no wonder that more days of sick leave are asked in MC.

Secondly, the author tend(s) to hold the assertion that residents in MC call for much more medical care than those in Leeville, however, it is not necessarily（necessary) the case. It is quite possible that due to finance limitation,(缺少连词) hospitals in Leeville seldom can（can seldom） afford more expenses on employing promising doctors, while on the other side, competent doctors abounds(abound) in MC's hospitals for they(指带不明确) can provide considerable salary and advanced research equipment. Other than that, residents in Leeville are not restricted to attain medical care in local hospitals. Commonsense tells us the residents in small towns go out of their ways to big cities with hope of getting advanced medical treatments when having severe diseases and resort to local hospitals when catching a cold. Without evidence that the hospitals in MC are accessible only to its residents, the argument can never be compelling.

Thirdly, the author strongly emphasizes the average age in Leeville is "significantly" higher than that in MC. The vague statement, without substantiated statistics, which I take leave to doubt, lends little support to the argument. Probably, the majority of the city residents are very young or even there are more new babies. However the old feeling like peaceful life out of the chaos move （s）to the nearby countryside. Under this circumstances(单数), the conclusion that people in Leeville survive a longer life than those in MC deserve more consideration.

Finally, even assuming that residents in Leeville do live a healthier and longer life than their neighbors in MC, the author commits a fallacy of hasty generation. Without clear evidence that the very places mentioned above are typical of the small towns and its counterpart-big cities. The author fails to rule out the possibility that such phenomena in these two places are exceptional for the whole situation.
To sum up, without clear evidence that people in Leeville lead a longer and healthier life than those in MC, without pointing out that the two places are  representative of countryside and big cities, the proposal raise by the author are still doubtful as it stands.

小错误过多 似乎基础不是很牢靠  但是看的出  对范文的研究挺多的  弥补不少
抓错抓的不错  加油