argument2 高频请拍

neuwolfUID: 2190099

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."

提纲：1、质疑调整的必要性和可行性
      2、错误类比，其中包含了对Brookville是否因为restriction而房价增长的怀疑
      3、列举其他可能的措施去push房价

Before the homeowners of Deerhaven accept the their committee's suggestion that restricting landscaping and houesepainting as Brookville will bring them a increasing values on the property, the following errors should be scrutinized. First, the arguer fails to consider the necessity and feasibility of the restrictions. Scoendly, analogies drawn between the Deerhaven and Brookville are suspect. Third, he/her neglects other alternatives.

There is no evidence provided shows that Deerhaven need a restriction. It is possible that the average property values are more than tripled of there are seven years ago in Deerhaven, and the ascending tendence still remains. If so, there is not necessary to take the risk to change the current situation, which may be a watershed to the decline of the houses values. Even the general prices of property are not so agreeable, whether widely restricting on landscaping and housepainting can be carried out is open to doubt. Perhaps the limited fund of Deerhaven is not enough to accomplish this big project. Residents' attitudes are important. Only a few inhabitants' objections will destory the uniform of the outlooking.

Otherwise, the assumption that Brookville is a good example to be imitated would be unwarranted if it does not take into accout the following factors. Are the Brookville's increasing house prices attributable to the restrictions? Perhaps the population of Brookville augmented largely during the seven year, more people means more requirment of houses, therefore, the raise in property valuses is due to the increasing population, and not due to the lanscape. Moreover, though the restrictions does benefit the Brookville, it is suspectable that the same measures will also work in the Deerhaven. Perhaps Brookville's houses are most small houses which are easy to handle while the majority of house in Deerhaven are skyscraper. These factor may stop the imitation.

Finially, the arguer fails to consider other alternatives to the increasing property values of Deerhaven. Such alternative may include improving the current traffic system to make the living in Deerhaven more convinience, or planting more trees to make the air more fresh, or building several park or amusement to enhance the culture ambience. These measures will make the situation of Deerhaven more comfortable for inhabiting, therefore, push on the house price.

To sum up, without consider these facets mentioned above, the arguer's conclusion is premature.