argument2 by ywcai [Flamy July互改小组]

ywcaiUID: 2153894

小弟能力有限，才刚起步，也不知道用这样的模板行不行的，也实写不出来，望各位dgdj多多指教，非常感谢！
TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - 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."
WORDS: 430         TIME: 上午 00:50:00          DATE: 2006-7-5

Merely based on unfounded assumption and the dubious evidence,the statement draw a presumed conclusion that Deerhaven Acres(DA) should adopt the similar restrains of Brookville(BV) on landscaping and housepainting in order to raise the property values .To substantiate the conclusion,the arguer cites the result of the enrichment of property value of BV's landhome,moreover,the arguer assume that as long as DA carry out the same restrains,the property value in DA would undoubtedly increase.A careful analysis of this argument would reveal how foundless it is.

One reason that I disagree with arguer is that there might be a bit correlation rather than a causality between the restrains of BV and the incresement of the house's property values.There is no evidence to indicate that the tripled raise is the direct result of those restrains cited above,it is possible that the other reasons made the great increasement,such as,the demand of house for other residents,the economic fluctuation this period,or the price of two different times,which is a span of seven years,and so forth,all these might be the better reasons for the raise of the value in BV.

On the other hand,the arguer commits a fallacy of arbitrary analogy with two distinct areas.As the argument goes,the DA should imitate what the BV done seven years ago,and correspondingly,the same result of the raise in property values will come to true.Although these restrains did applied successfully in BV , it does not necessiarily amount to the significant increasement of the property values in DA,in other words,it lacks the credibility that these done could benifit the raise considerably just like what the BV has achieved,For example,the one studies hard and gets a good score in a math test,while the another one studies hard too,but he might got a bad one,why is it,the answer might be complex and various. May be the methods of studing,may be extent of hardwork,or even the talent of two students,all these different aspects could greatly impact the achievement of two students in the examination.So,something similar in this argument,no adequate evidences to show the restrains applied in DA would get the same results,what's more,the time of the application of restrains in two area is different.

To sum up,the evidence cited in the anslysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims.To make the argument more logically acceptable,the arguer should provide more information concerning how the BV increase their values exactly by the restrains,to better evaluate the argument ,we need more concrete evidences that the feasibility of these restrains applied in DA.If the argument include the given factors discussed above,it would be more thorough and adequate.

ywcaiUID: 2153894

先顶下！