ARGUMENT131 JET小组第10次作业

linkccUID: 2413074

题目：ARGUMENT131 - The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.

"The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni."
字数：470          用时：00:30:00          日期：2008-2-21 10:01:36

In this argument, the author claims that by abandoning their regulations and adopting those of Omni, Tria Island can restore fish populations and protect marine wildlife. To support this argument, the author cited the regulations of Omni. However, after a close scrutiny, there is few evidences to support this argument.

First of all, the threshold problem with the argument is that the author reasons that the decline in fish populations in Tria is the result of overfishing, not pollution. The author provides no evidence that the fishing in the Tria caused the decline in fish populations in Tria. Without the statistics about the number of fishmen and the amount of fising, it is highly possible that the pollution caused the decline in fish populations.

Furthermore, even assuming the overfishing caused the decline in fish populations in Tria, the author can not recommend that Tria should adopt the same regulations as Omni. It is highly doubtful that the assumption that Tria is analogous to Omni in all respects. Moreover, there are points of differences far overweight the similarities between these two islands. For example, the weather condition and the quality of water .Or perhaps in the Tria Island, there is almost few fishing within 10 miles of Tria. If only ban the fishing in 10 miles, the number of fish populations still be declining. Without in details analyzing these and others factors, the author can not draw a conclusion that Tria Island should adopt the regulations of Omni.

Finally, even if the way of adopting regulations of Omni can bring the restore of fish populations in Tria, the author can not confirm that the way is best. There is no information about other way of restoring fish populations and protecting all of Tria's Marine wildlife. It is highly possible that by improving the management of regulation, the Tria Island can restore the fish populations. In addition, the way of restore fish populations can not equal to the way of protect all of marine wildlife. Perhaps, protecting marine wildlife need some more advanced technology. Lacing information that other way of restore fish populations and special way of protecting wildlife, the author can not expect us to take seriously that adopting the regulations of Omni is the best way of restoring the fishing populations and protecting marine wildlife.

In sum, the author can not convince me that by abandon their regulations and adopt those of Omni, Tria Island can restore the fish populations and protect marine wildlife. To better evaluate this argument, I need more evidences that the decline in population is caused by the overfishing not the pollution. Furthermore, the author also need provide that the analogous information between Tria Island and Omni Island and sufficient evidence to explain that no other way is better than the way of regulation of Omni.