argument2 076G myth 小组第一次作业--Phevos

phevos_xxUID: 2258006

1、        土地价格上涨与采取的措施之间无直接因果联系，也没有排除他因
2、        Brook与deer进行了错误的类比

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."

------------------------
In this letter, the author suggests that the Deerhaven Acers community should adopt an own set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting to raise property values. The fact given by the author that supports the suggestion is the average property values have tripled in Brookville since the Brookville community adopted the same restrictions 7 years ago. However, there are two fallacies in this letter.

The most severe problem of the letter is that the author fails to show us that the rising of the average property values is caused by the set of restrictions adopted by Brookville community. It is the truth that the average property value of Brookville has tripled in the past seven years. However, the rising may rely on several factors. The inflation may actually cause the tripled rising. And some other actions taken by Brookville, such as attracting more people to settle in Brookville, will also lead to the rising. Without considering or excluding the influence of these factors, we can not assert that the rising is caused by the set of restrictions. It is strongly suggested that the author should take a comprehensive survey on the property market in Brookville.

At the second place, the author establishes a wrong analogy between Brookville's property market and Deerhaven Acres'. Assuming that the property rising in Brookville is caused by the set of restrictions taken by Brookville community 7 years ago, there is no evidence show that we will get a same result in Deerhaven Acres under similar set of restrictions. Actually, if the residents in Deerhaven Acres are against the restrictions, they would probably move to some other places instead of repainting their house in such a restricted color. For a more convincing evaluation, the author should take a survey among the people living in Deerhaven Acres about their attitude about the restrictions.

In conclusion, the author fails to show us the effect of the suggestion that Deerhaven Acres should adopt an own set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting in order to raise property values. The author should take surveys among the residents in Deerhaven Acres to know what they think of the restriction. And, there should be a contrasting analysis on the property market between Brookville and Deerhaven Acres. Before all these above, we can not find a convinced reason to support the author's suggestion.

最後の使徒UID: 2257608

In this letter, the author suggests that the Deerhaven Acers community should adopt an own set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting to raise property values. The fact given by the author that supports the suggestion is the average property values have tripled in Brookville since the Brookville community adopted the same restrictions 7 years ago. However, there are two fallacies in this letter.哪两个错误可以概括性的用从句加进来，和那篇ISSUE一样，暗示行文结构是开篇首句令文章更有结构性的一种措施。

The most觉得这个词有点绝对，草率推广和无支持因果关系两个错误说不清谁更严重吧？ severe problem of the letter is that the author fails to show us that the rising of the average property values is caused by the set of restrictions adopted by Brookville community. It is the truth that the average property value of Brookville has tripled in the past seven years. However, the rising may rely on several factors. The inflation may actually cause the tripled rising. And some other actions taken by Brookville, such as attracting more people to settle in Brookville, will also lead to the rising.several factors和后面列举原因可以用复杂句串起来，现在感觉短句太多，有些散，而且它因列举的比较少，也不够直观，例如B区是怎么吸引其他人的？单纯的概述很难给读者一个直观有力的印象，而且现在的文章字数比较少，完全可以在这里扩充。Without considering or excluding the influence of these factors, we can not assert that the rising is caused by the set of restrictions. It is strongly suggested 这个词有些削弱论证的强度，用necessary更好些 that the author should take a comprehensive survey on the property market in Brookville.

At the second place,这个和第一段的内容逻辑上应该是层进关系，用并列式开头不太合适，不如直接把让步假设提到前面来，这样两段的关系会更紧凑些 the author establishes a wrong analogy between Brookville's property market and Deerhaven Acres'. Assuming that the property rising in Brookville is caused by the set of restrictions taken by Brookville community 7 years ago, there is no evidence show that we will get a same result in Deerhaven Acres under similar 原文貌似没提到这种限制是相似的set of restrictions. Actually, if the residents in Deerhaven Acres are against the restrictions, they would probably move to some other places instead of repainting their house in such a restricted color.这个假设显得没头没尾，前面是说不一定会得到同样的结果，中间应该加上句“因为这里那里的情况会不一样”，然后接上“比如居民会反对这样的限制” For a more convincing evaluation, the author should take a survey among the people living in Deerhaven Acres about their attitude about the restrictions.基本上这段的论述没有用上7年这个时效性的问题，列举的他因也比较少。

In conclusion, the author fails to show us the effect of the suggestion that Deerhaven Acres should adopt an own set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting in order to raise property values.这句的感觉是把两个逻辑错误揉在一起说了，有些泛泛，不如分开来说。 The author should take surveys among the residents in Deerhaven Acres to know what they think of the restriction. And, there should be a contrasting analysis on the property market between Brookville and Deerhaven Acres. Before all前面就说了两个，是不是该用BOTH？these above, we can not find a convinced reason to support the author's suggestion.

总体而言虽然把握了主要的攻击点，但是文章的行文结构有些松散，而且它因列举这里比较薄弱，造成了字数也比较少，建议注意下句与句，段与段之间的连贯性以及开头、结尾对全文的统率和总结作用，让反驳更有力度:)