Arguement14[YB-1]7.9作业 byxxhhtt

xxhhttUID: 2477361

A 14
提纲：
开头：conclusionevidence flaw
正文：
一 攻击调查
1.范围变化 nation――》suburban town

原因 该地居民的fresh vegetable的来源并非 supermarket

本地的supermarket的fresh vegetable 的质量并不差
2．调查结果构不成充分条件

其他因素 例如 金钱精力成本 及 自己种的并不一定比超市好
二 攻击magazine论据
1．Magazine近三个月并非比原来卖的好

Magazine本身就好，印刷量少，报亭位置好，从而不能说明人们 more and more interested in。。。
2 即便卖的比原来好 并非是由于人们对种蔬菜的兴趣增加了
3.偷换gardening和grow vegetable 的 概念
4.即便兴趣增加，构不成充分条件，人们并非会决定种蔬菜
三 攻击最后建议

Greatly 和 variety 据缺乏调查
结尾

让结论更可信的三条建议，即总结上述三个flaw
我觉得写得太罗索了，若干重点也没把握好。烦大家指点。
In this argument theauthor concludes that we can increase our profits by greatly expanding thevariety of vegetable seeds this coming spring， To support this conclusion, the authorcites a national survey which has shown that many consumers were dissatisfiedwith the quality of fresh vegetables available in supermarkets. In addition,the author points out that a local gardening magazine has sold out at a newsstand three months in a row. However, these alone do not constitute a logicalargument in favor of the conclusion and fail to provide convincing support tomaking this argument convincing and invulnerable.

First of all, the survey cited leads nosupport to the argument. The author assumes that the nationwide statisticsabout the consumers’sdissatisfaction with the quality of fresh vegetables in supermarkets appliesequally to a suburban town which
thegardening center serves. Yet this might not be the case, given that a suburbantown is near to the country, sometimes people there can get fresh even just pickedvegetable directly from the farmers. The vegetables in the supermarket may notbe the main source for them to get vegetables. Even if they mainly buyvegetables from supermarket, they may not dissatisfy with the quality of freshvegetables in the supermarket of the town. Perhaps the supermarket in this towncan easily, quickly and cheaply get high-quality fresh vegetable from the nearcountries, and perhaps it has good equipment to keep the vegetable fresh.Without ruling such possibilities, the author can’t justifiablyconclude that the many people in this suburban town are as dissatisfied as theresult of national survey.

Even if the people in the town are reallydissatisfied with the quality of the fresh vegetable in town’s supermarket, it is not sufficientto infer that they will choose to grow vegetables by themselves from theseevidence. Although people in suburban town may have a big garden to growvegetable, people would have to spend some money on seeds and dead stock. Furthermoregrowing vegetable on one's own needs some specific knowledge and techniquessuch as when and how to plant, irrigate and fertilize which are complex. Inaddition no evidence in this argument promises that the vegetable grown onone's own must be better than the vegetable in the supermarket.
Taking these costs of money and vigor anduncertainty into consideration, maybe few people will choose to grow bythemselves and then few people will buy seeds.

Another problem that weakens the logic ofthis argument is that the evidence of the sold out gardening magazines seemsnot strongly relevant to the conclusion that consumers are more and moreinterested in growing their vegetables. The fact the gardening magazine Great Gardenshas sold out at the Village News stand three months in a row has many possiblereasons. For example, Great Gardens is such a useful and attractive magazinethat it always sells out or the number of Great Gardens published is so smallthat it can be easily sold out, or perhaps the Village News stand has a so goodlocation such as a corner of two busy streets that many people passing by buy magazinethere and all the magazines sell well there. In short, without the
former market state of this magazine and justone news stand, it can’t beinferred that the magazine sells well than before. Furthermore, even if we assumethat the magazine sells well than before and more and more people want to buyit, the conclusion still can’t
be drawn that people in the town are more andmore interested in growing vegetables.
Not providing sufficient evidences about people’smotivation to buy magazines, the author fails to establish the causalrelationship between the well-selling magazine and increasing interest ingrowing vegetable.
It is highly possiblethat other factors contribute to the magazine’swell-selling. For instance the magazine is revised making itself moreinteresting and attractive than before. And as spring is coming and the seasonis suitable for doing some gardening work, buying some magazine relative withgarden seems very common. In addition, gardening work includes growing varietyof plants, cutting a lawn etc, but not just growing vegetable. The author seemsto substitute growing vegetable for all the gardening work. Lacking compellingevidence that links the well-selling magazine with the people’s increasing interests in growing vegetable, it is presumptuous toinfer that people’s interests in growing vegetables isincreasing from a magazine’s well-selling.

Even if consumers are more and moreinterested in growing plant, it is still
questionable that interest’sincreasing will necessarily result in buying seeds to grow vegetable. Asmentioned above, growing vegetable needs money and vigor with uncertainty toharvest. How many people will decide to grow vegetable is still a question.
　　BeforeI come to my conclusion , it is necessary to point out the last flaw involvedin this argument that the author’s suggestion lacks relevantsurveys about how many seeds are really needed and what kinds of seeds areneeded by the consumers. Without these surveys, greatly expanding the varietyof vegetable seeds this coming spring will have a very high risk to gainprofit. Some kinds of seeds might not sell well and the cost may not be gotback.
　　Tosum up, this arguer fails to substantiate his claim that we can increase ourprofits by greatly expanding the variety of vegetable seeds this coming spring,because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to whatthe arguer maintain. To make the argument more convincing, the author wouldhave to provide more information with regard to the local consumers’attitudes to the fresh vegetable in local supermarket and the main sourcethey get fresh vegetable. Additionally, he would have to demonstrate thatpeople’s interest in growing vegetable is reallyincreasing from several cogent aspects. And last, he should have to give somesurveys associated with the quantity and variety that the consumers need. Therefore,if the argument had included the given factors discussed above, it would havebeen more thorough and logical acceptance.

weenbopperUID: 2423595

A我也处于扫盲阶段,不过还是提自己的几点意见吧..
1建议在写A之前列一个小提纲,作者大致是怎么得到错误结论的,这样可以使文章逻辑性更强,举个很简单的例子,你第一、二段可以合为一段。TS就用 即便卖的比原来好 并非是由于人们对种蔬菜的兴趣增加了， 然后段落分层分别叙述两个观点。
2字数太多，东西写的多，当然的犯错的机会也就会高，其实只要字数够了就行，没必要追求字数上的快感。
恩，个人意见，仅供参考，加油加油！

xxhhttUID: 2477361

2# weenbopper
看了范文的分析，发现要首先搞清楚题目的逻辑是怎样的，逻辑错误在哪里，而不是上去乱攻击。
此外正文段控制在三四段比较合适