argument195 April小组 第二周作业

rubenUID: 2163558

195The following is a letter from an editor at Liber Publishing Company to the company's president.
"In recent years, Liber has unfortunately moved away from its original mission: to publish the works of regional small-town authors instead of those of big-city authors. Just last year, 90 percent of the novels we published were written by authors who maintain a residence in a big city. Although this change must have been intended to increase profits, it has obviously backfired, because Liber is now in serious financial trouble. The only way to address this problem is to return to our original mission. If we return to publishing only the works of regional small-town authors, our financial troubles will soon be resolved."

In the letter, the arguer attributes current financial trouble of Liber Publishing Company to that it changed its original mission. This argument sounds reasonable at first glance. The deep analysis on the arguer's evidences, however, reveals that none of these facts supports the conclusion.

First of all, as mentioned in the letter, 90 percent of the novels published by Liber were written by authors who keep a residence in a big city. But this does not mean that these authors are big-city authors. It is completely possible that these authors still live in regional small-town in most of the year and their works have similar style and attract same readers with those written by regional small-town authors. If it is true, there is no reason to conclude that this change has moved Liber away from its original mission.

Moreover, the fact that 90 percent of the published novels were written by authors having a residence in a big city does not present that these novels can not bring increased profits. The author fails to consider that it is entirely possible that the financial trouble is caused by other reasons besides the mission change. Perhaps Liber over invested in other kinds of publishing in addition to books, but failed. So although novels have created profits, Liber is still in serious financial trouble.

Finally, it is an unexamined assumption that Liber will soon resolve its financial trouble by returning to publishing only the works of regional small-town authors. Perhaps these kinds of works are not as popular as before, so Liber will not benefit from this suggestion. Or perhaps the profits of publish market are very low now, and any change of publishing mission will not be helpful to the financial troubles. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author can not make me believe that the suggestion will help Liber to overcome its financial troubles.

In a sum, the conclusion of the author depends on doubtful facts and analysis which make it unbelievable. To make the conclusion more reliable, we need know more evidences to reveal that the new publish mission do decrease profits. And to reinforce the conclusion, the author should make me believe that returning to previous mission will resolve current financial troubles.

九微火UID: 2343684

argument195 April小组 第二周作业
195The following is a letter from an editor at Liber Publishing Company to the company's president.
"In recent years, Liber has unfortunately moved away from its original mission: to publish the works of regional small-town authors instead of those of big-city authors. Just last year, 90 percent of the novels we published were written by authors who maintain a residence in a big city. Although this change must have been intended to increase profits, it has obviously backfired, because Liber is now in serious financial trouble. The only way to address this problem is to return to our original mission. If we return to publishing only the works of regional small-town authors, our financial troubles will soon be resolved."

In the letter, the arguer attributes current financial trouble of Liber Publishing Company to that it changed its original mission（感觉用the changes of its original mission 比较好，一般原因归结为一个名词，不是从句）. This argument sounds reasonable at first glance. The deep analysis on the arguer's evidences, however, reveals that none of these facts supports the conclusion.（模板）

First of all, as mentioned in the letter, 90 percent of the novels published by Liber were written by authors who keep a residence in a big city. But this does not mean that these authors are big-city authors. It is completely possible that these authors still live in regional small-town in most of the year and their works have similar style and attract same readers with those written by regional small-town authors. If it is true, there is no reason to conclude that this change has moved Liber away from its original mission.
（感觉这个缺陷只是个细节缺陷，第一段就花了一大段来论述有喧宾夺主之嫌。可以这样，或者与其他一二原因并列为第一段，或者到后面再指出全篇的若干细节问题比较好。）

Moreover, the fact that 90 percent of the published novels were written by authors having a residence in a big city does not present that these novels can not bring increased profits. The author fails to consider that it is entirely possible that the financial trouble is caused by other reasons besides the mission change. Perhaps Liber over invested in other kinds of publishing in addition to books, but failed. So although novels have created profits, Liber is still in serious financial trouble.
（这一段比较好，层层递进，三句话分了三个层次。）

Finally, it is an unexamined assumption that Liber will soon resolve its financial trouble by returning to publishing only the works of regional small-town authors. Perhaps these kinds of works are not as popular as before, so Liber will not benefit from this suggestion. Or perhaps the profits of publish market are very low now, and any change of publishing mission will not be helpful to the financial troubles. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author can not make me believe that the suggestion will help Liber to overcome its financial troubles.（这一段也比较好，两个假定比较有说服力）

In a sum, the conclusion of the author depends on doubtful facts and analysis which make it unbelievable. To make the conclusion more reliable, we need know more evidences to reveal that the new publish mission do decrease profits. And to reinforce the conclusion, the author should make me believe that returning to previous mission will resolve current financial troubles.
（结尾用模板，比较规范。）

看了全文，再反观第一个问题。感觉稍有不同， 也并不是喧宾夺主。楼主是按原材料的行文顺序来论述的，所以这么下来，和后面两个瑕疵也可以鼎足而三了。只是后面的相对来说好论述些——那些瑕疵是间接的，不是直接相关，所以有必要用逻辑说明一下。而第一个瑕疵，一句话就可以点明白，演绎成了三四句话，有些蛇足。而且，在看开头的时候，我们有先入为主的感觉，知道这篇是ARGU,后面就必然有更多的瑕疵要论述。第一段有些饶舌，可能会影响后面的。我觉得最好把最精彩的东西放在前面，不然前面有凑篇幅之感。
至于语言上面，已经很流畅了。一来是ARGU，语言要求不高，而且ARgu比较重模板。二来楼主的语言已经很不错，我没法再挑刺了。如果再进一步，那就是逻辑上更深入一些。

snowsleepUID: 2449254

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - 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 recommends that Deerhaven Acres should adopt their own set of restrictions an landscaping and housepainting in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres. To strengthen this recommendation, the arguer cite a supporting evidence that such restrictions contributes to Brookville's property values triple. I find this argument  rests on some ungrounded fallacies.


First of all, the arguer commits a false cause. At first glance, it seems somehow reasonable that the tripled property values in Brookville is a response to a set of restriction they adopted, but a close scrutiny reveals that this might not be the case. Although Brookville did adopted how to landscaped its community's yards and how to paint their exteriors of homes, the tripled property values may affected by other factors, such as the booming economy , the famous house quality, the style of those houses or the improved transportation which offers people more convenience . What is more, the arguer does not provide any related evidence showing how the property values in Brookville is stimulated. Without considering such explanations , the arguer cannot make a causal relationship between the restriction adoption and tripled property values.


Secondly, the arguer commits a false analogy. For one thing, either the restriction adoption or the tripled property values happened seven years ago, which m ight not work at the present . For the other thing, even I concede that the seven-year-ago restriction will be feasible, the argument is still based on the unsubstantiated assumption that Deerhaven Acres and Brookville are sufficiently alike in ways that might stimulate the property values. Deerhaven Acres's homes might not suitable for repainting due to their different styles has already formed their own charming , or Deerhaven Acres is undergoing a economic depression. For that matter, such restriction will not make any sense for Deerhaven Acres.


Finally, the arguer fails to take other solutions to make Deerhaven Acres' property values raise. It seems that the arguer is trapped in a dead lock that follow ing what Brookville did seven years ago is the only way to raise Deerhaven Acres' property values, other ways, however, might work even better, such as put ting a advertisement in the national newspaper or enhanc ing the overall environment in the community. Without taking such possibilities into account, the arguer may too hastily draw his conclusion.


To sum up, the arguer's recommendation about restriction adoption in Deerhaven Acres is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer must provide much evidence indicating that the reason s why Deerhaven Acres' property values does not raise. To better assess it, the arguer also need to convince me that the solution Brookville take will certainly be acceptable and preferable for Deerhaven Acres to follow, and such is the only way out of not raised property values as well .