Argument216【0806G-Sunbird小组】第5次作业

toumingsenlinUID: 2344846

TOPIC: ARGUMENT216 - The following appeared in a magazine article about planning for retirement.

"Because of its spectacular natural beauty and consistent climate, Clearview should be a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire. As a bonus, housing costs in Clearview have fallen significantly during the past year, and real estate taxes remain lower than those in neighboring towns. Nevertheless, Clearview's mayor promises many new programs to improve schools, streets, and public services. Retirees in Clearview can also expect excellent health care as they grow older, since the number of physicians in the area is far greater than the national average."
WORDS: 448          TIME: 00:20:00          DATE: 2007-11-16 16:44:40

Merely based on unfounded assumptions and dubious evidence, the argument draws a conclusion that Clearview is a top choice for anyone seeking a place to retire. To support this conclusion, the author points out that housing cost and real estate taxes remain lower than neighborhood. In addition, he assumes that retirees can expect excellent health care as they grow older. Furthermore, he reasons that Mayor in Clearview would keep his promise. However, this alone neither constitutes a logical argument in favor of the conclusion nor provides compelling support making the argument sound. The author ignores certain important concerns which must be addressed to prove. In my point of view, the argument suffers from 4 flaws.

First of all, the author assumes that the advantage in housing cost and real estate among neighborhood reflects the whole advantage in the nationwide. Yet, the author does not offer any evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. Absent such evidence, it is likely that the housing cost and real estate tax in Clearview are much higher than other cities in the nation. For that matter, the author's recommendation would amount to poor advice.

In addition, the author assumes too hastily that the large amount of doctors would lead to good condition of health care. However it is not the case. Perhaps most doctors in Clearview are not professional or good enough to make any treatment for patients. Or perhaps the majority is interns. In that case, we can not sure the quality of health care in Clearview. Thus, the author can not safely draw any significant conclusion.

Furthermore, the argument suffers from a fallacy of all things are equal. The fact that the large amount of physicians in Clearview can not draw a conclusion that the amount will remain the same in future. The author assumes this trend without justification that the background conditions have remained the same at different time. It is not clear whether the current conditions are the same as they will be in the future. Thus, it is impossible to conclude that the excellent health care will be available when people get older.

Besides, Mayor's promise is problematic. Promise is one thing, but to keep it is far more difficult. There is no indication that they will fulfill their promises. As a consequence, the author can not make any prediction.

To sum up, the argument seems to be plausible. In fact it is neither sound nor persuasive. Not only does it leave out such key issues, but also it cites in the argument the evidence which does not lend strong support to what the author claims. To make the argument more convincing, the author would have to take the following conditions into consideration: first, comparing local housing cost and real estate taxes with other cities in the nation; secondly, the qualified doctors' certificates. If the argument includes the factors discussed above, it would be more adequate and thorough.