Argument184【07-10G Superstar大帖】7.18 by Huaxinluobo

huaxinluoboUID: 2326780

Time : 30'  Words : 470

In this argument the speaker support the decision that the library replace books that are borrowed no more than once a year with sufficient new books to solve the problem that people who want to read a recent novel frequently find that the only copy is checked out. To get support the writer also shows that protest of this plan only comes from a few people who are not presentative and thus can be ignored. However, after scrutiny I find it suffering from a few flaws.

First of all, the writer unfairly distribute the cause of the problem of lack of recent novel to be checked out to the fact that seldom borrowed books take too much space. But, no evidence have given to prove it. It is possible that the free space in the library is absolutely enough to store new books, in which case removing old books is unnecessary. Moreover, even if lots of new books is placed, the problem may still exist, for perhaps people only like to read newest books in the library and library can not always satisfy them because library can not totally filled with new books. So , lacking sufficient evidence the plan seems not to be feasible to me.

Secondly, the writer unfairly assume that the protest arising after the plan is opened is equal to the protest that may arise after the plan have taken place. However, the writer fails to prove it or show that there is no possibility of people changing their minds. It is entirely possible that only a few people know the plan and protests, after the plan takes places, more people may discover that and protest; or perhaps that those who know the plan and support it may change their minds when they find that the books they need have be removed by the plan. So with limited evidence it is unreasonable to ignore the protest now.

Thirdly, even the condition of protest may not change when the plan is taken into reality, the writer’s conclusion is still got too hastily for the thirty people’s influence is unknown now. Without more information of the jobs, status and positions of the thirty people, the plan may cause more problem than it solve. Perhaps the thirty persons account for a large proportion of who donate to the library, or some of them may have high position in office or government and thus their opinion may greatly influence the money distributed to the library in budget. So unless the writer can prove that the thirty people have little influence, the conclusion is unconvincing.

To sum up, the argument can not convince me that the plan is effective and beneficial to the library. To get better supported the writer need to prove that the plan can solve the problem and cause no other problems.