ARGUMENT7 =August Rush=小组第6次作业 by crepuscularlyw

crepuscularlywUID: 2645654

TOPIC: ARGUMENT7 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."
WORDS: 472
TIME: 00:37:10
DATE: 2009-8-2 19:02:32

In this argument, the editor suggests that we should elect Ann Green (AG) rather than Frank Braun(FB) in the next mayoral election. To make the suggestion acceptable, the editor points out that the current members are not protecting the environment and AG can help us solve this problem.

To begin with, the examples the editor cites to explain that the current members are not protecting the environment is not convincing. The factories in Clearview (C) has doubled do not mean the factories result in worse pollution since not all factories are pouring waste gases into the air or pouring polluted water randomly and those factories which need to emit the wastes may take some precaution actions to decrease the pollution. Unless the arguer can provide some statistics relate to the wastes pouring the arguer should not make this hasty judgment. Besides, more patients with respiratory can not tell us that the pollution is worse since respiratory disease include throat diseases which may be caused by cold, too loud voices and lung disease which may due to too much smoking. Judge from this, how many people suffer from respiratory illnesses because of the air pollution remains to be a question. To convince us, the arguer should give us statistics concerning the actual number of air pollution victims.


Secondly, it is too assertive to say that AG will help the C to solve the environmental problems because she is a member of Good Earth Coalition. Before we choose AG, we will think about whether or not AG can make the city more environmental and the living standard can be better? AG is a member of the GEC does not mean she has the ability to solve the environment problems, some achievements of her actions about the environment protection need to be presented to the residents in order to show that she has the ability. Even though AG can help us solve the environment problems, this mere fact still can not win our election because what the residents care most may be their own lives rather than the environment, thus, if she can not solve problems like the unemployment, poverty and so on she then is not qualified for the job.

Thirdly, the arguer unfairly neglects FB's advantages. For instance, FB is a member of C town council so that FB may be more familiar with C's affairs, which is superior to AG. Again, FB is a member of C town council does not mean FB does not concern about the environment, it is possible that FB has already contributed a lot to C in environment protection. To make the right choice, we need to know more information about FB.

To sum up, the arguer's argument is not persuasive. To bolster it, the arguer should provide more information relate to these two candidates as well as the current environment situation.

超时。。。什么时候A才能写进30min啊！