Argument137 0606G-kito小组leedgen习作，来拍砖啊，谢谢大家

leedgenUID：160823

137.The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.
"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."

提纲：
1．调查存在很多疑点：多少人参加了调查，问卷是否合理等等
2．曾经有抱怨水质问题，但不一定是人们不在M河上娱乐的原因
3．即使调查结果可信，人们也确实是因为水质不好才不在M河上娱乐，那么计划清理河水是否能有效也未知, so结论很武断，即使M河的娱乐用途有可能增长，改善沿岸的公用土地的预算是否需要增加还不能确定

The arguer suggests that the Mason City council needs to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River for the reason that recreational use of the river is probable to increase. After looking into this editorial carefully, I deem that this argument suffers from several fallacies as follows.

The first problem in this argument is that the survey is lacking in its validity. The author provides little necessary information with respect to those surveys. When were these surveys conducted? How many respondents were there? Were the questionnaires organized reasonably? Without such crucial factors, it is impossible for us to believe the validity of the results. Therefore, the argument is based on an unsolidified survey so that it is rash to give out the final suggestion.

Another vital flaw is that it is arbitrary for the author to conclude that residents are avoiding the unclean water in the Mason River for the reason that there have been complaints about the quality of the water. We have no idea about the exact time of these complaints, nor the possible actions the council has taken regarding these complaints. It is highly possible that some measures have been put into practice to clean the water in the river. Besides, the exact reason why residents seldom use the Mason River for recreational activities is unknown now. It could be dangerous creatures in the river rather than the bad quality of the water.

Granted that the result of the surveys are trust-worthy, and it is true that the unclean water is the factor people seldom come to play in the river, will the plan to clean the river turn out a practical means? As we know, the clean of the water involves several factors, like the polluted water from industries, the current upriver conditions. It will take a quite long period to clean a river, thus it is unfair for the Mason City council to increase its budget right now.

To summarize, several critical deficiencies exist in this arguments so that the Mason City council need to have a careful investigation concerning the local situations before take any actions. To make the suggestion more convincing, the author should figure out the reason that residents are unwilling to use the Mason River for recreational activities.

[ 本帖最后由 yogurt4 于 2006-1-26 13:52 编辑 ]

bunnymz2005UID：2146758

提纲：
1．调查存在很多疑点：多少人参加了调查，问卷是否合理等等
2．曾经有抱怨水质问题，但不一定是人们不在M河上娱乐的原因
3．即使调查结果可信，人们也确实是因为水质不好才不在M河上娱乐，那么计划清理河水是否能有效也未知, so结论很武断，即使M河的娱乐用途有可能增长，改善沿岸的公用土地的预算是否需要增加还不能确定（你的提纲写的很好，但是下面论证似乎与之不符）
The arguer suggests that the Mason City council needs to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River for the reason that recreational use of the river is probable to increase. After looking into this editorial carefully, I deem that this argument suffers from several fallacies as follows.

The first problem in this argument is that the survey is lacking in its validity. The author provides little necessary information with respect to those surveys. When were these surveys conducted? How many respondents were there? Were the questionnaires organized reasonably? Without such crucial factors, it is impossible for us to believe the validity of the results. Therefore, the argument is based on an unsolidified survey so that it is rash to give out the final suggestion.（这段的问题是太泛泛，几乎整段使用模版，这有点儿夸张了吧，要有适当的细节论证才好）

Another vital flaw is that it is arbitrary for the author to conclude that residents are avoiding the unclean water in the Mason River for the reason that there have been complaints about the quality of the water. We have no idea about the exact time of these complaints, nor the possible actions the council has taken regarding these complaints. It is highly possible that some measures have been put into practice to clean the water in the river. Besides, the exact reason why residents seldom use the Mason River for recreational activities is unknown now. It could be dangerous creatures in the river rather than the bad quality of the water.（这段论证很好，并且有了适当的细节，简洁；另外还有一些因素，比如人们没时间去活动，并不是因为水质污染的问题，或者人们可以在室内的湖里进行活动，不一定非要选择Mason河）
Granted that the result of the surveys are trust-worthy, and it is true that the unclean water is the factor people seldom come to play in the river, will the plan to clean the river turn out a practical means? As we know, the clean of the water involves several factors(whether the water is clean depends on several factors), like the polluted water from industries, the current upriver conditions. It will take a quite(quite a) long period to clean a river, thus it is unfair for the Mason City council to increase its budget right now.(这段还是那个毛病，问题想得都挺好，但是缺乏必要的细节论证，比如，你提到了工业污染状况以及上游的水质状况，那你就可以接下来再补一句上游怎么污染了，工业怎么污染了这样的细节。还有一个问题，很重要，你这段的逻辑不太对。结尾你说清理一条河需要很长时间，因此Mason City没必要现在增加预算。这有什么关系么？)
To summarize, several critical deficiencies exist in this arguments so that the Mason City council need to have a careful investigation concerning the local situations before take any actions. To make the suggestion more convincing, the author should figure out the reason that residents are unwilling to use the Mason River for recreational activities.
总结起来，这篇的问题主要有两个，第一个就是细节问题，这个多看看范文你就知道了，很容易做到的。第二个是逻辑的问题，比如你的body3，很让人迷惑的，表述不清楚。
优点是行文很简洁，让人看着清清楚楚。