Argument29 大家拍

sisong2003UID: 2154005

TOPIC: ARGUMENT29 - When Ida McAllister ran for mayor of Lake City four years ago, she failed to win even 30 percent of the vote. But since then, McAllister has made public her commitment to environmental causes. She would be wise, therefore, to announce her intention to close all Lake City parks to automobile traffic, thus following the example of the former mayor of Plainsville, Alecia Yu . On the recommendation of a small group of concerned citizens, Mayor Yu prohibited automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks, and therefore was credited with solving the pollution problem and improving the quality of life in Plainsville. This action would have great appeal to the citizens of Lake City, most of whom participate in the community's recycling program, and would guarantee McAllister's success in her current quest to be Lake City's new mayor.
WORDS: 404          TIME: 1:58:52          DATE: 2006-11-30

提纲：
1.       类比错误：两个不同的地区类比不恰当
2.       参加社区循环项目的人不代表他们会对这个项目感兴趣，或者支持她当选
3.       论断武断：竞选需要其它衡量因素，环保只是一个，其它降低犯罪、提高福利也许会引起选民兴趣

正文：
In this argument, the author claims that if she closes all the Lake City parks to automobile traffic, she will win the election of the Lake City's mayor. Although this sounds reasonable at first sight, it failed to point out several important factors, without which, the argument is ungrounded.

To begin with, the argument relies on what might be a false analogy of the Plainsville's prohibition of automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks and the closing of all Lake City parks to automobile traffic. The arguer assumes that Plainsville and Lake City are similar in all aspects, however this assumption is unwarranted. For example, the traffic situation and air condition in these two cities maybe not the same. Perhaps after prohibition automobile traffic in all parks in Plainsville, the traffic situation and air condition are still worse than those in Lake City. And the prohibition of automobile traffic in the Plainsville parks was recommendation by a small group of concerned citizens, without surveying the local citizens of Lake City, the arguer fails to convince me that the citizens of Lake City are willing to close the parks to automobile traffic.

Secondly, most citizens of Lake City participate in the community’s recycling program do not necessarily indicate that these citizens would support the close of automobile traffic, or eventually guarantee her success in her current quest to be Lake City’s new mayor. Perhaps this community's recycling program is mandatory for Lake City’s citizens, and they may show little interest in this traffic prohibition of parks program, or they might feel inconvenient to park after this program carrying out that they will be against this program. Even if these citizens support the prohibition of automobile traffic is little indication that they will elect McAllister as their new mayor. The argument contains no evidence to convince me that the citizens participate in the community’s recycling program will guarantee McAllister’s success.

Finally, the argument rests on hasty generalization that the commitment of environment will lead to successful election of Lake City’s mayor. As to the common sense of taxpayers, commitment of environment may be only one of the considering factors. Perhaps the citizens are more interested in the leading abilities, decrease of crime or improvement of social well-being. Without considering other possible factors of election the arguer convince me little.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks of credibility. To strengthen the conclusion, the arguer should provide more evidences about the above-mentioned possibilities.

第一次，完全是拼凑起来，很多论证语言不熟练，以后加强

[ 本帖最后由 sisong2003 于 2006-12-1 00:44 编辑 ]

最後の使徒UID: 2257608

格式..格式...http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/thread-208286-1-1.html

看了下开头, 作者没说如果IM同学关了所有公园吧, 只是说如果她那么宣布而已, 她还没当市长是办不了的

第二段里作者也没有假设两个城市所有情况都相同, 只是说在L市会收到跟P市相同的效果而已. 这种类比用不着 所有 情况都相同吧? 别把自己的话说得绝对了, 这样很容易露出破绽的. 另外后面几句攻击也没什么逻辑: P市空气质量比L差就能说P市采用了这种行动环境好了而L不行么? P市的小部分市民提议跟L市的民意调查又有什么关系呢? 而且最后那句话已经跟下面一段的攻击跑到一个点上去了.

建议楼主写完后看下自己的文章是不是连贯...结构跟语言一样重要..

sisong2003UID: 2154005

多谢楼上的，由于刚开始看ARGUMENT，对各种错误还不是很熟，自己加强把

graduate06UID: 2223299

组里面明天会挂一个漏洞总结，注意看。加油！！！
一定要注意格式，参看一下我的帖子。:handshake

hugo010311UID: 2237388

In this argument, the author claims that if McAllister closes all the Lake City parks to automobile traffic, she will win the election of the Lake City's mayor. Although this sounds reasonable at first sight, it failed to point out several important factors, without which, the argument is ungrounded.

To begin with, the argument relies on what might be a false analogy of the Plainsville's prohibition of automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks and the closing of all Lake City parks to automobile traffic. However, the arguer's assumption that Plainsville and Lake City are similar in all aspects is unwarranted. For example, the traffic situation and air condition in these two cities maybe not the same (might be different). Perhaps after prohibition automobile traffic in all parks in Plainsville, the traffic situation and air condition are still worse than those in Lake City. Even if they are the same, the prohibition of automobile traffic in the Plainsville parks was recommended by a small group of concerned citizens, (it does not indicate that most of the ….) without surveying the local citizens of Lake City, the arguer fails to convince me (us) that most of the citizens of Lake City are willing to close the parks to automobile traffic.

Secondly, most citizens of Lake City participate in the community’s recycling program does not necessarily indicate that these citizens would support the close of automobile traffic, and eventually guarantee her success in her current quest to be Lake City’s new mayor.(Ts不错) Perhaps this community's recycling program is mandatory for Lake City’s citizens, and they may show little interest in this traffic prohibition of parks program, or they might feel inconvenient to go to parks after this program carrying out that they will be against this program. Even if these citizens support the prohibition of automobile traffic is little indication that they will elect McAllister as their new mayor. (不知道能不能这么说)。 As a result, the arguer fails to convince me that the citizens participate in the community’s recycling program will guarantee McAllister’s success.

Finally, the argument rests on hasty generalization that the commitment of environment will lead McA to successful election of Lake City’s mayor. As to the common sense of taxpayers, commitment of environment may be only one of the considering factors. Perhaps the citizens are more interested in the leading abilities, decrease of crime or improvement of social well-being. Without considering other possible factors of election the arguer convince me little.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility? evidence! （that … will win the election of the Lake City's mayor）. To strengthen the conclusion, the arguer should provide more evidences about the above-mentioned possibilities.

sisong2003UID: 2154005

THANK U,