ARGUMENT42 [Victors小组]第十一次作业 by jennetrj

jennetrjUID: 2275453

ARGUMENT42 - The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.

"In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea's main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign."
WORDS: 550         TIME: 00:30:00         

In this proposal, the author recommends the country of Paraterra to hire current director of Bellgea's National Tourism Office as the consultant for the campaign to develop economy all around the country. To justify this recommendation, the author claims that nearby country, Paraterra, had more foreign visitors at its main airport and per capita income of Bellegea increased by 10% after the strategy of ecotourism. However, close scrutiny reveals several flaws in it.

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that economy in Bellegea improved last year. However, evidences showed in the passage are insufficient. Although per capita income increase by 10%, it is totally possible that in other countries this figure reached more than 70% and the average data is about 50%. In other words, the economy could be even lag behind the average level, let alone the improvement. Until the author provides enough statistical data about the economic information, the conclusion that Bellegea's economy got boomed could not be taken seriously.

Besides, the author assumes that tourism revived in Bellegea since doubled foreign visitors arrive at the main airport. Nevertheless, this is not the case. Maybe those arrivals contributed to transfer flights which had the destination of other countries. Or perhaps those people arrived at Bellegea only for family visits other than sight-seeing or business trips. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine author's assumption that ecotourism attracted more visitors to Bellegea.

Even assuming that upper two allegations are true, no warrant could be made that the advertising aimed for ectotourism should be responsible for the development. The only relationship between the advertisement and the economy improvement is the chronological orders of these events. Maybe the tourism just underwent its fluctuation and happened to get out of the lowest point. Or perhaps the travel agency offered special discount so as to attract more people to visit the country. Without eliminating or even considering those possibilities, the author could not convince me to accept author's conclusion.

Granted that the advertising was effective as the author presumed, no warrant could be made that it would also bring economy boom to Paraterra. The difference between the two countries might much overweigh the similarities of them, for instance, Paraterra is a hinterland country that there is nearly no good scene capable for sight-seeing. Or perhaps the climate in Paraterra is much harsher so that visitors could hardly acclimate to it. Besides, even the advertisement could do good to tourism in Pareterra, it is not necessarily due to the work of one individual, like the one mentioned in the passage. So the necessity for hiring the officer still remains to be a question, let alone his eligibility of leading the strategy for the country. Until the author completes the analysis, the recommendation is untenable as it appears.

In sum, the argument is groundless as it stands. To consolidate it, the author should provide more evidences--maybe by specific economic statistics--to show that Bellegea's economy improved last year. In addition, the author should eliminate other possible factors relating to such improvement and establish the causal relationship between ecotourism and better economy. To better assess the argument, we need to know whether there's the need to hire the officer as the director and if it would be effective to improve economy in Paraterra.

solartorchUID: 2244205

In this proposal, the author recommends the country of Paraterra to hire current director of Bellgea's National Tourism Office as the consultant for the campaign to develop economy all around the country. To justify this recommendation, the author claims that nearby country, Paraterra, had more foreign visitors at its main airport and per capita income of Bellegea increased by 10% after the strategy of ecotourism. However, close scrutiny reveals several flaws in it.

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that economy in Bellegea improved last year. However, evidences showed in the passage are insufficient. Although per capita income increase by 10%, it is totally possible that in other countries this figure reached more than 70% and the average data is about 50%.怎么说呢，有这种可能，但是不符合常理啊，虽然argument就是鸡蛋里挑骨头。。。 In other words, the economy could be even lag behind the average level, let alone the improvement. Until the author provides enough statistical data about the economic information, the conclusion that Bellegea's economy got boomed could not be taken seriously.

Besides, the author assumes that tourism revived in Bellegea since doubled foreign visitors arrive at the main airport. Nevertheless, this is not the case. Maybe those arrivals contributed to transfer flights which had the destination of other countries. Or perhaps those people arrived at Bellegea only for family visits other than sight-seeing or business trips. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine author's assumption that ecotourism attracted more visitors to Bellegea.

Even assuming that upper two allegations are true, no warrant could be made that the advertising aimed for ectotourism should be responsible for the development. The only relationship between the advertisement and the economy improvement is the chronological orders of these events. Maybe the tourism just underwent its fluctuation and happened to get out of the lowest point. Or perhaps the travel agency offered special discount so as to attract more people to visit the country. Without eliminating or even considering those possibilities, the author could not convince me to accept author's conclusion.

Granted that the advertising was effective as the author presumed, no warrant could be made that it would also bring economy boom to Paraterra. The difference between the two countries might much overweigh the similarities of them, for instance, Paraterra is a hinterland country that there is nearly no good scene capable for sight-seeing. Or perhaps the climate in Paraterra is much harsher so that visitors could hardly acclimate to it. Besides, even the advertisement could do good to tourism in Pareterra, it is not necessarily due to the work of one individual, like the one mentioned in the passage. So the necessity for hiring the officer still remains to be a question, let alone his eligibility of leading the strategy for the country. 这点真是说得精彩！ Until the author completes the analysis, the recommendation is untenable as it appears.

In sum, the argument is groundless as it stands. To consolidate it, the author should provide more evidences--maybe by specific economic statistics--to show that Bellegea's economy improved last year. In addition, the author should eliminate other possible factors relating to such improvement and establish the causal relationship between ecotourism and better economy. To better assess the argument, we need to know whether there's the need to hire the officer as the director and if it would be effective to improve economy in Paraterra.

逻辑很清晰，非常佩服。高手:loveliness: