Argument234[Aero小组第三次作业]

houyanchunUID: 2432949

Argument234
The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"There is now evidence that the relaxed manner of living in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. Furthermore, Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents, but in Mason City the proportion of physicians to residents is five times as high. And the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These findings suggest that people seeking longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities."

In this argument, the author recommands that in order to be healthier and longer, people should consider moving to small communities rather than cities. To support his claim, the author cites workers in the small town of Leeville have fewer days of sick leave taken than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. In addition, the author also cites Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents while five times in Mason City. Furthermore, the evidence is provided by author is the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These evidences seem reasonable at first sight, however, there are crucial fallacies in the argument as following.

First of all, the evidence that workers in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City is not representative the overall statement. It is very possible that the workers in Mason City take heavily pressures so that many of them are suffering sick during the reporter surveyed. What is more, the situation of those two places is not sufficient to validate the author’s conclusion if workers are same health in others places no matter in cities or town.

Secondly, the author’s recommendation seemly rests on the irrelevant assumption that the number of physician does not demonstrate the health statement of dwellers of a certain place. In addition, It is entire possible that the residents in Mason City are more care of their health or the amount of old residents is higher than in Leeville so that they need more physicians while most of residents in Leeville are  youth and juvenile/teenage. The author fails to provide the construction of age of these two places resulting in the conclusion can not be validated.

In addition, the average age of residents in Leeville is higher than in Mason City is not support the author's claim. The evidence only mentions the average age is higher rather than longer. It deserves to consider that whether the age of most of population in Leeville is higher than in Mason City naturally. What is more, it is alternative that only a part of residents who are longevity in Leeville have increased the whole average age while others’ age are no more than the average level in Mason City. Even if the average age of most of dwellers in Leeville is longer than in Mason City’s indeed, it is too earlier to conclude that people will be more healthier and longevity living in small town. There are other alternatives to explain the reason of health of residents in Leeville, such as most of them are likely to do exercise and have a balanced diet so that they are healthy rather than the relaxed manner of living in town. Moreover, the author fails to offer any evidences to point out how to benefit residents by the relaxed manner of living in town. Thus, we can not deduce whether the manners are efficient.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. In order to convince us to accept the claim, the author should provide more imposing evidence to explain the construction of population of these two places and the survey in Mason City and Leeville is sufficient to represent the whole situation of other places. Further, the author should provide special evidence to explain the reason of longevity only due to the relaxed manner of living in small towns.

武寒UID: 2300087

In this argument, the author recommends that in order to be healthier and longer, people should consider moving to small communities rather than living cities. To support his claim, the author cites workers in the small town of Leeville have fewer days of sick leave taken than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. In addition, the author also cites Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents while five times in Mason City. Furthermore, the evidence is（delete）provided by author is the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These evidences seem reasonable at first sight, however, there are crucial fallacies in the argument as following.

（按照传统的三部分方法写开头）First of all, the evidence that workers in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City is not representative the overall statement. It is very possible that the workers in Mason City take heavily pressures so that many of them are suffering sick during the reporter surveyed. （感觉工作压力大来指出survey不支持论点不大好）What is more, the situation of those two places is not sufficient to validate the author’s conclusion if workers are same health in others places no matter in cities or town. 也许是想说把工人的健康状况推广到residents太牵强，但是文中没有明确提出，可以在第一句后面加上。Secondly, the author’s recommendation seemly rests on the irrelevant assumption that the number of physician does not demonstrate the health statement of dwellers of a certain place. In addition, It is entire possible that the residents in Mason City are more care of their health or the amount of old residents is higher than in Leeville so that they need more physicians while most of residents in Leeville are youth and juvenile/teenage. The author fails to provide the construction of age of these two places resulting in the conclusion can not be validated.In addition, the average age of residents in Leeville is higher than in Mason City is not support the author's claim. The evidence only mentions the average age is higher rather than longer. It deserves to consider that whether the age of most of population in Leeville is higher than in Mason City naturally. What is more, it is alternative that only a part of residents who are longevity in Leeville have increased the whole average age while others’ age are no more than the average level in Mason City. Even if the average age of most of dwellers in Leeville is longer than in Mason City’s indeed, it is too earlier to conclude that people will be more healthier and longevity living in small town.（在这里分段吧） There are other alternatives to explain the reason of health of residents in Leeville, such as most of them are likely to do exercise and have a balanced diet so that they are healthy rather than the relaxed manner of living in town. Moreover, the author fails to offer any evidences to point out how to benefit residents by the relaxed manner of living in town. Thus, we can not deduce whether the manners are efficient. In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. In order to convince us to accept the claim, the author should provide more imposing evidence to explain the construction of population of these two places and the survey in Mason City and Leeville is insufficient to represent the whole situation of other places. 这句话前后部分意思不同，再看一下阿Further, the author should provide special evidence to explain the reason of longevity only（感觉应该说also）due to the relaxed manner of living in small towns.