Argument170 [Victors小组]7月7日作业 by c0053

c0053UID: 2285120

题目：ARGUMENT170 - For the past five years, consumers in California have been willing to pay twice as much for oysters from the northeastern Atlantic Coast as for Gulf Coast oysters. This trend began shortly after harmful bacteria were found in a few raw Gulf Coast oysters. But scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. Once consumers are made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters, they are likely to be willing to pay as much for Gulf Coast as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for Gulf Coast oyster producers will follow.
字数：550          用时：50min          日期：2007-7-8

In this argument, the arguer concludes that after consumers are aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast(GC) oysters, they will pay as much for the GC as for northeasten Atlantic Coast oysters(AC) and that GC oyster producers will obtain more profits. To justify his claim, the arguer provides the evidence that a process has been devised by scientists to kill the bacteria found in certain GC oysters. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

First of all, the arguer failed to provide evidence that how the process devised by scientists is conducted and whether it is effective in killing all the harmful bacteria. Maybe the process is not well designed to kill all the bacteria and the left will reproduce their descendents thus there will still be bacteria in GC oysters. Maybe the dead bacteria is still harmful to human's health. And it is highly possible that the nutrient of oysters may be damaged during this process. Without any evidence regarding the above matters, we are not convinced that the process can improve the safety of GC oysters.

Secondly, the arguer fails to present any information concerning consumers' more awareness of GC oysters' increased safety. Even if the process to kill bacteria is effective, without any propaganda and advertisement, consumers can hardly know. There is possibility that consumers still buy AC oysters since they got no information of the increased safety of GC oysters.

In addition, the arguer fails to convince us that consumers will be willing to pay as much for GC oysters as for AC oysters. There is no evidence to show the similarity between the two kinds of oysters. Maybe the GC oysters have better quality, or bigger size, or more favorable tastes. And there is possibility that the twice money consumers pay AC oysters is because of the amount of oysters provided have fallen since the bacteria were found in GC oysters. Now since the GC oysters' bacteria problem has been settled, there are enough oysters provided, they would not pay so much money to both AC and GC oysters companies. Without accounting for and ruling out all these possibilities, the arguer cannot convincingly concludes that consumers will pay as much for GC as for AC oysters.

Finally, even if the problem of bacteria has been settled and prices for GC oysters has risen, there are not enough evidence that GC oyster producers will get more profits. It is quite possible that GC oyster producers' cost has increased in the process of killing oysters, or the sales are declined due to customers’ fear of potential harm since the affair of bacteria. The evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to validate the conclusion that the profits of GC oyster producers will raise.

In conclusion, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis is not sufficient to support what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence that the process of killing bacteria is effective and that people are well known of the increased safety of GC oysters. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding the qualities of AC and GC oysters and the cost, sales situations of GC oyster producers after killing the oysters.

coraoneUID: 2233021

题目：ARGUMENT170 - For the past five years, consumers in California have been willing to pay twice as much for oysters from the northeastern Atlantic Coast as for Gulf Coast oysters. This trend began shortly after harmful bacteria were found in a few raw Gulf Coast oysters. But scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. Once consumers are made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters, they are likely to be willing to pay as much for Gulf Coast as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for Gulf Coast oyster producers will follow.
字数：550          用时：50min          日期：2007-7-8

In this argument, the arguer concludes that after consumers are aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast(GC) oysters, they will pay as much for the GC as for northeasten Atlantic Coast oysters(AC) and that GC oyster producers will (用虚拟语气would会不会好一点？讨论下)obtain more profits. To justify his claim, the arguer provides the evidence that a process has been devised by scientists to kill the bacteria found in certain GC oysters. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

First of all, the arguer failed to provide evidence that how the process devised by scientists is conducted and whether it is effective in killing all the harmful bacteria.（这个主题句要改改，我觉得不要把说不足evidence放在攻击的中心，argument就那么点字的题目，不足是肯定，关键是攻击推导，而且我觉得你攻击点有点问题，我感觉这是一个backgroud，虽然说假如你这个process没有用怎么办呢？但是是不是有点强词夺理的味道呢？我不认同这个攻击点） Maybe the process is not well designed to kill all the bacteria and the left will reproduce their descendents thus there will still be bacteria in GC oysters. Maybe the dead bacteria is still harmful to human's health. And it is highly possible that the nutrient of oysters may be damaged during this process. Without any evidence regarding the above matters, we are not convinced that the process can improve the safety of GC oysters.（）

Secondly, the arguer fails to present any information concerning consumers' more awareness of GC oysters' increased safety.（有一次强调说不足information哦，问题还是我前面说的那样，并且两端都是不足evidence，是不是也是一个欠缺考虑呢？） Even if the process to kill bacteria is effective, without any propaganda and advertisement, consumers can hardly know. （这个理由还是有点牵强..那我也可以说之前大家也都不知道GC oysters里面有bateria呀~）There is possibility that consumers still buy AC oysters since they got no information of the increased safety of GC oysters.

In addition, the arguer fails to convince us that consumers will be willing to pay as much for GC oysters as for AC oysters. There is no evidence （发现了第三个no evidence，我不是对no evidence有仇，但是这类的错误只是很弱的一类攻击点）to show the similarity between the two kinds of oysters. Maybe the GC oysters have better quality, or bigger size, or more favorable tastes. And there is possibility that the twice money consumers pay AC oysters is because of the amount of oysters provided have fallen since the bacteria were found in GC oysters. Now since the GC oysters' bacteria problem has been settled, there are enough oysters provided, they would not pay so much money to both AC and GC oysters companies. Without accounting for and ruling out all these possibilities, the arguer cannot convincingly concludes that consumers will pay as much for GC as for AC oysters.

Finally, even if the problem of bacteria has been settled and prices for GC oysters has risen, there are not enough evidence（又一个no evidence...即使作者说了很少的information，也不能都供给no evidence呀，那些错误因果，错误类推，错误比较去哪里了？） that GC oyster producers will get more profits. It is quite possible that （这个句型用了好多次啦，换换）GC oyster producers' cost has increased in the process of killing oysters, or the sales are declined due to customers’ fear of potential harm since the affair of bacteria. The evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to validate the conclusion that the profits of GC oyster producers will raise.

In conclusion, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis is not sufficient to support what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence that the process of killing bacteria is effective and that people are well known of the increased safety of GC oysters. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding the qualities of AC and GC oysters and the cost, sales situations of GC oyster producers after killing the oysters.（连续两个To做目的状语的句型，需要变变句式）


楼主的argument还需要提高哈，注意我以上提到的几个方面，欢迎跟进讨论。
祝进步！
coraone

coraoneUID: 2233021

请也好好帮我的改改哈，诚挚地欢迎你的指点！