argument2［加州阳光小组 ]第一次作业from lastpearl

lastpearlUID: 2119955

2.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.这些规定有可能并没有在Brookville community 真正的执行。
2.即使在Brookville community 执行了这些规定，Brookville community地产价格的升值也可能是由于其他的原因造成的。
3.Deerhaven 和Brookville community 错误类比。

The author recommends that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres homeowners should adopt restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. To justify this conclusion the author sites that seven years ago homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a similar restrictions average property values have tripled after that. Close scrutiny of each of these facts reveals that it lends credible support to the recommendation.

First of all, the author assumes that Brookville community implemented the restrictions. However, the author fails to provide any sufficient evidence to support this assumption. The restrictions were not mandatory. May be the residents who live in Brookville community have their own design of the house. If these restrictions were not implemented, then any change in Brookville community cannot be attributed to them. Accordingly, the author cannot conclude that the homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should follow the restrictions.

Secondly, even if the homeowners in Brookville community implemented the restrictions. The author assumes that the increase of average property values attributed to the restrictions. However, the author rules out other possibilities that may be responsible for the increase. Perhaps a myriad of employee flowed in Brookville, so the demand for housing was increasing. Or perhaps, the supply of housing has decreased. Even the increase of population can raise the amount of houses which have been sold out. In short, without more convincing evidence, the author cannot convince me that the property values have been increased due to restrictions.

Finally, the author fails to take into account possible difference between Deerhaven Acres and Brookville. The problem is that the two places are not similar enough to justify the analogical deduction. For example, the Deerhaven homebuyers may not be interested the exteriors of homes have any color, or they may be suffice to decorate the yards for themselves. For that matter, the homebuyers would not buy a house that yards have been landscaped and exterior homes have been painted colors. In other words , without evidence that the homebuyers of Deerhaven Acres and Brookville would be equally interested the style offered bye the restrictions . I cannot accept the author’s conclusion that the restrictions will carry the same result for Deerhaven Acres as for Brookwill.

In summary, this argument is not convincing as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author would have to show that the restrictions have implemented in Brookville and were attributed to the increase of average property values. Additionally, the author must provide evidence of the other factors home that prices in two areas are essentially the same. Only with more coming evidence could this argument more than just an emotional appeal.

lixiaomin046400UID: 2207959

2.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.这些规定有可能并没有在Brookville community 真正的执行。
2.即使在Brookville community 执行了这些规定，Brookville community地产价格的升值也可能是由于其他的原因造成的。
3.Deerhaven 和Brookville community 错误类比。

The author recommends that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres homeowners should adopt restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. To justify this conclusion the author sites that seven years ago（加since） homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a similar restrictions average property values have tripled after that. Close scrutiny of each of these facts reveals that it lends credible support to the recommendation.

First of all, the author assumes that Brookville community implemented the restrictions. However, the author fails to provide any sufficient evidence to support this assumption. The restrictions were not mandatory. May be the residents who live in Brookville community have their own design of the house. If these restrictions were not implemented, then any change in Brookville community cannot be attributed to them. Accordingly, the author cannot conclude that the homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should follow the restrictions. (这个理由挺新颖，赞一下)
Secondly, even if the homeowners in Brookville community implemented the restrictions. The author assumes that the increase of average property values attributed to the restrictions. However, the author rules out other possibilities that may be responsible for the increase. Perhaps a myriad of（发现lastpearl喜欢用这个词，我认为不太恰当） employee flowed in Brookville, so the demand for housing was increasing. Or perhaps, the supply of housing has decreased. Even the increase of population can raise the amount of houses which have been sold out. In short, without more convincing evidence, the author cannot convince me that the property values have been increased due to restrictions.

Finally, the author fails to take into account possible difference between Deerhaven Acres and Brookville. The problem is that the two places are not similar enough to justify the analogical deduction. For example, the Deerhaven homebuyers may not be interested （in）the exteriors （exterior）of homes have any color（having修饰home的吧）, or they may be suffice to decorate the yards for themselves. For that matter, the homebuyers would not buy a house that yards have been landscaped and exterior homes have been painted colors. In other words , without evidence that the homebuyers of Deerhaven Acres and Brookville would be equally interested （in）the style offered bye（by粗心，呵呵） the restrictions . I cannot accept the author’s conclusion that the restrictions will carry the same result for Deerhaven Acres as for Brookwill.

In summary, this argument is not convincing as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author would have to show that the restrictions have implemented in Brookville and were attributed to the increase of average property values. Additionally, the author must provide evidence of the other factors home that （是that home吧）prices in two areas are essentially the same. Only with more coming evidence could this argument more than just an emotional appeal.

lastpearl逻辑挺清晰，有些句子是模仿北美范文和孙远的吧，嘿嘿，我也有。