Argument2 越洋农场战队第三周作业

huhu_zsuUID: 2183490

In this argument,the arguer recommends that the residents of Deerhaven Acres adopt the set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting as the Brookville community did seven years ago,in order to raise property values of their community.To support this argument, the arguer cites the the example of their neighbor--Brookville community,whose property value raised significantly after they adopt（时态？？） such restrictions.The argument has some merits on the surface,however,a careful examination would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.（这个结尾比较有心意，没有照搬例文得句子。）
First of all,for a survey to be persuasive,it must be close enough in time to the      generalization it supports,so historical changes will not invalidate the conclusion.However,we find that the example cited in the argument to support its conclusion is an event happened seven years ago,since many changes may occur during such a long period,no one can ensure that the situation of today remains the same as seven years ago,thus the conclusion it reaches might be seriously weakened.For example,the average value may have changed during the seven years,and the economic situation may also changed.（这两句话读起来有点罗嗦，是否可以用as well as之类的把两句连起来）Unless the arguer can provide evidence to demonstrate that the market and economic situation have not altered,we have good reason to doubt（这句话给人感觉太“白”了，我写作时不太喜欢用“good”） whether it is effective to adopt a plan which was used seven years ago.

In the second place,the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the raise of property value of Bookville and the set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exterios of homes should be painted.We find no evidence to link these two phenomena.So we doubt that the arguer may failed to considered and rule out other possibilities that may also lead to the raise of property value of Brookville.For instance,maybe a supermaket was opened after the Brookville adopted those restrictions,or the pollution problems be significantly alleviated,or the educational condition be ameliorated（我有些怀疑，这些可能行是否在美国依然成立）--all these can result in the raise of property value of the community.Unless the arguer can prove the direct causal relationship between the restrictions and the raise of property value and rule out other possibilities,we will not accept this recommendation.

Finally,the recommendation may not be practical,since it ignores one importance condition--whether all the residents in Deerhaven community agree to uniform their homes in order to raise property value.The arguer unfairly assumes that all people in the community concern more about the property value of their homes than the idiosyncrasy of their homes.It is totally likely that many people in the community have a intense sense of individuality and may reluctant to（是勉强作的意思么？那就是最后还是采用了？？） have their beloved homes be painted and landscaped in the identical way.

To sum up,this argument is not persuasive because it suffers from（用suffer挺特别） several critical fallacies.To strenthen the argument, the arguer may have to establish a causal relationship bewteen the raise of property value and the adoption of those restrictions.To better evaluate this argument,we need more information concerning whether all or the majority of residents in Deerhaven are willing to raise the value of their house on the cost of sacrificing the idiosyncrasy of their homes.

语言不错，学习。
至于思想，argu大同小异。不多说了。
建议：有些地方显得比较罗嗦，可以举更多得例子支持观点。