Argument2 Thrive小组第1次作业

舒子baxiaUID: 2401739

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 arguer, a committee of homeowners from Deerhaven Acres, recommends that a set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting should be adopted in Deerhaven Acres. The recommendation is based on the fact that average property values have tripled in Brookville since the homeowners there adopted restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. However, the statement does not constitute a logical argument in favor of its conclusion and fails to provide compelling support to making this argument sound.

To begin with, a threshold assumption the recommendation relies on is that the restrictions adopted in Brookville were well implemented. Lacking evidence that substantiates the assumption, it's entirely possible that only few homeowners in Brookville executed the restrictions. If that is the case, the recommended restrictions make no means.

Besides, even if the restrictions are well carried out in Brookville, the arguer attributes the increase of average property to the uniform exteriors. But the arguer overlooks some other reasons for the increase. For example, it is totally possible that the local financial have developed in the past seven years, or that several factories have been built near Brookville and the population in Brookville has risen. Without ruling out there possible factors, the arguer cannot justify his conclusion.

In addition, even if the foregoing assumptions are substantiated, we cannot conclude based on the merely fact that the restrictions were available seven years ago. Lots of things might have changed during the seven years. Might people’s preferences have changed or they pay most emphasis on the appearance when choosing house while they cares more about the structure and fitments. In short, we cannot infer from the instance seven years ago that it will apply nowadays.

Finally, the arguer fails to account for the differences between Deerhaven and Brookville. For instance, it is entirely possible that Deerhaven buyers who are found of uniqueness have no   interest in the uniform exteriors. In addition, other possible differences, such as traffic, function of the house, residents’ incoming and so on are overlooked. Without showing that the two communities are similar in these and other aspects, the arguer cannot attest his recommendation.

In sum, the arguer cannot justify his conclusion resting on the scant evidence provided in the recommendation. To strengthen his recommendation, the arguer is supposed to survey that to what extent did the restrictions carried out in Brookville. Besides, the arguer should show that it is the restrictions that are responsible for the increase of average property values in Brookville, and more information about whether Deerhaven and Brookville are similar in the factors which affect the property values shuole be given.

zhuzhuorUID: 2452739

In this argument the arguer, a committee of homeowners from DeerhavenAcres, recommends that a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting should be adopted in Deerhaven Acres. The recommendation isbased on the fact that average property values have tripled inBrookville since the homeowners there adopted restrictions onlandscaping and housepainting. However, the statement does notconstitute a logical argument in favor of its conclusion and fails toprovide compelling support to making(make) this argument sound.

To begin with, a threshold assumption the recommendation relies on isthat the restrictions adopted in Brookville were well implemented.Lacking evidence that substantiates the assumption, it's entirelypossible that only few homeowners in Brookville executed therestrictions. If that is the case(In this case), the recommended restrictions make nomeans.

Besides, even if the restrictions are(were) well carried out in Brookville,the arguer attributes the increase of average property (values) to the uniformexteriors. But the arguer overlooks some other reasons for theincrease. For example, it is totally possible that the local financial(finance)have developed in the past seven years, or that several factories havebeen built(感觉不是很需要完成时啊，斟酌斟酌...) near Brookville and the population in Brookville has risen.Without ruling out there(these) possible factors, the arguer cannot justifyhis conclusion.

In addition, even if the foregoing assumptions are substantiated, wecannot conclude based on the merely(mere/only) fact that the restrictions wereavailable seven years ago. Lots of things might have changed during theseven years. Might people’s preferences have changed or they pay mostemphasis on the appearance when choosing house while they cares moreabout the structure and fitments.(这句话的逻辑似乎有点不清晰;d:) In short, we cannot infer from theinstance seven years ago that it will apply nowadays.

Finally, the arguer fails to account for the differences betweenDeerhaven and Brookville. For instance, it is entirely possible that(这个句式用第三次啦)Deerhaven buyers who are found of uniqueness(不理解..) have no interest in theuniform exteriors. In addition, other possible differences, such astraffic, function of the house, residents’ incoming and so on areoverlooked. Without showing that the two communities are similar inthese and other aspects, the arguer cannot attest his recommendation.

In sum, the arguer cannot justify his conclusion resting on the scantevidence provided in the recommendation. To strengthen hisrecommendation, the arguer is supposed to survey that to what extentdid the restrictions carried out in Brookville. Besides, the arguershould show that it is the restrictions that are responsible for theincrease of average property values in Brookville, and more informationabout whether Deerhaven and Brookville are similar in the factors whichaffect the property values shuole be given.


后记：
看了你的文章，才发现之前我对题目理解有误...
感觉这篇比issue51那篇顺很多呀，难道是你和我一样都感觉那篇比较难么:(
你的第一条论点非常强有力...我没想到，受教了...
我的词汇和语言都不行，如果改的有问题请见谅