argument2 [practise小组]quickbreeze第一篇！

quickbreezeUID: 195262

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."

time: 46:13    words: 528
In this argument, the committee proposes to set restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in Deerhaven Acres. To support this proposal, the committee cites the example of nearby Brookville community who has adopted such restrictions and has had the average property values tripled. At the first glance, this argument seems to be somewhat reasonable; however, careful scrutiny reveals that the committee reaches a questionable conclusion because of wrong causality, vague data and wrong analogy, which are discussed below.

First of all, when introducing the example of Brookville community, the arguer simply impose a cause-and-effect relationship between two things which occur one another but may have no relationship indeed. Two things which happen in order don't equal or even imply that the former causes the latter. Thus Although Brookville community adopted the restrictions first and property values arose later, the arguer fails to prove the relationship between the two. It is also possible that other reasons have contributed the result of property value increase. For instance, maybe Brookville community has set a series of beneficial regulations which facilitate the procedure of house purchasing and attract more buyers. Also, maybe the education level in Brookville community has been improved considerably; and parents are willing to pay more for a house nearby their children's school.

Moreover, the data that average property values have tripled in Brookville community is a no convincing one which tells nothing useful. "Tripled" seems to be a large one. But no definite illustration can be acquired since this number itself is an absolute one. It is possible that properties in other communities have increased for four, if not even more, times and then three times isn't much at all. Or it's also possible that before the adoption of restrictions, property values in Brookville community had augmented at a much faster speed and "tripled in these seven years" is in fact a lowered speed. Unless the arguer provides more clear data regarding other communities and the prices before, the committee cannot support the prosperous conditions Brookville community.

Finally, the argument is even weakened by the wrong analogy between Brookville community and Deerhaven Acres, even if the argument above is trustworthy. Although two communities may be near in distance, at the same time they may have profound differences which make the analogy impractical. Maybe the residents in Deerhaven Acres like more free styles and repel restrictions. Also the two communities have separate economical situation and maybe the property values in Deerhaven Acres has already reaches a state of saturation. So the committee need to do careful research and comparison, otherwise I can't believe the restrictions of Brookville community can also be applied to Deerhaven Acres.

In sum, the argument is not persuasive while the arguer reaches an invalid conclusion. To strengthen this analysis, the arguer should clarify the relationship between the adoption of restrictions and average property values. Also, more data is required to support the suggestion that situation in Brookville community is in fact a good one. To be logically acceptable, the arguer needs a careful comparison between the two communities to persuade me that the restrictions are also feasible in Deerhaven Acres as well as in Brookville community.