Arguement2 Victors组 第2次作业

菲子UID: 2311527

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."

主要批驳点：
1．  造成Brookville房地产价格升高可能另有原因。假设移民是主要原因。
2．  两个小镇之间是否足够类似，使得同样的措施有效。
3．  最近一两年Brookville房地产价格是否仍然上升，如果没有，措施也可能无效。

In this argument, the arguer recommends adopting a set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting. This recommendation is based on the observation that the average property values in Brookville have tripled since the adoption of those restrictions seven years before. Meanwhile, the arguer assumes that adopting the same restriction will increase the property values in Deerhaven Acres, either. However, this argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

Firstly, there is no clear evidence showing that the increment of the property values in Brookville attributes to the adoption of those restrictions. It is possible that the past seven years is the prime of property industry in Brookville, for thousands of people immigrated into this town. In that case, it was the immigration rather than the restrictions that caused the property values tripling. It is equally possible that the property values might increase more than that without the restrictions. Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual cause of the tripling of property values.

In the second place, the arguer says nothing about the similarity between the two towns. The residents in Deerhaven might not accept the same landscaping and the same house painting as their counterparts in Brookville do. Further more, the house locating in Deerhaven might extremely differs from which in Brookville, which means the same appearance of houses might brings about other problems such as getting lost. Therefore, even if the restrictions have led to the increment of the property values in Brookville, whether it will work in Deerhaven remains to be a problem.

In addition, the arguer fails to mention how the property values developed in recent one or two years. If the property values did not increase in Brookville in recent years, it might be possible that the restrictions will not work anymore. Consequently, the adoption of restrictions in Deerhaven might not work, either.

To conclude, the arguer should demonstrate more information concerning how the adoption of the restrictions led to the tripling of the property values in Brookville. In addition, the analogical deduction will not be accepted until the arguer demonstrates more about the similarity between the two towns and the recent development in Brookville.

ghost33UID: 2267869

In this argument, the arguer recommends adopting a set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting. This recommendation is based on the observation that the average property values in Brookville have tripled since the adoption of those restrictions seven years before. Meanwhile, the arguer assumes that adopting the same restriction will increase the property values in Deerhaven Acres, either. However, this argument is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted assumptions.

Firstly, there is no clear evidence showing that the increment of the property values in Brookville attributes to the adoption of those restrictions. It is possible that the past seven years is the prime of property industry in Brookville, for thousands of people immigrated into this town. In that case, it was the immigration rather than the restrictions that caused the property values tripling. It is equally possible that the property values might increase more than that without the restrictions. Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual cause of the tripling of property values.

In the second place, the arguer says nothing about the similarity between the two towns. The residents in Deerhaven might not accept the same landscaping and the same house painting as their counterparts in Brookville do.（题目中已经说到他们要采取自己的一套方案） Further more, the house locating in Deerhaven might extremely differs from which in Brookville, which means the same appearance of houses might brings about other problems such as getting lost. Therefore, even if the restrictions have led to the increment of the property values in Brookville, whether it will work in Deerhaven remains to be a problem.

In addition, the arguer fails to mention how the property values developed in recent one or two years. If the property values did not increase in Brookville in recent years, it might be possible that the restrictions will not work anymore. Consequently, the adoption of restrictions in Deerhaven might not work, either.

To conclude, the arguer should demonstrate more information concerning how the adoption of the restrictions led to the tripling of the property values in Brookville. In addition, the analogical deduction will not be accepted until the arguer demonstrates more about the similarity between the two towns and the recent development in Brookville.
进步很快。加油！

菲子UID: 2311527

谢谢