Argument131 [Jet小组}第十次作业

sunneptuneUID: 2451588

In this argument, the arguer concludes that 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. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining recently due to pollution. In addition, the arguer reasons that Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. As discussed below, the argument suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands

First of all, the author provides us no information to illustrate that the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing. The author only points out the regulations of Tria do not ban fishing, which does not surely lead to overfishing. The argument does not provide us the concrete data of the amount of fishing population and the amount of fish which were caught. Perhaps the less fish populations in certain time in this area is a normal situation because of the migration of the fish. Moreover, the author claims that the declination of fish populations does not attribute to pollution, which has no evidence. There is a possibility that the quality of water in this area are going to the bad. Just because of this change, the fish populations is less than ever before. Without ruling out these factors, the author's assertion is wholly unconvincing.

Secondly, this argument is based on a false analogy. The author simply assumes that if Tria adopt the regulations of Omni's, the fish populations of Tria will have a inclination and the marine wildlife of Tria will be protected. However, no evidence is provided to illustrate that these two areas are comparable. It is true that both islands are the marine sanctuary, but there exist fundamental differences: perhaps the geographical factors of these areas differ from each other obviously and the economic circumstances also have some differences. So the legitimate concerns vary from each other. Therefore, though the regulations of Omni proved effective in protecting marine wildlife, there is no guarantee that it will work just as well in Tria island.

Finally, the author only claims that the best way to improve protecting the marine wildlife is to adopt the ways of Omni's, but no evidence is provided to convince me reach an agreement with the author's assertion. The author overlooks other possible factors which maybe more effective than this measure. For example, in the marine sanctuary we could not only ban dumping, offshore oil drilling and fishing but also could take some measures to improve the quality of the water and maintain the balance of the marine wildlife.

In sum, the argument is well-presented, but not well-reasoned. To strengthen this argument, the author has to provide us evidence that the two islands are similar in every aspect. In addition, to better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the relationship between the declination of fish populations in Tria and overfishing and pollution.

aijaUID: 2461373

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our—用 their比较客观 regulations and adopt those of Omni’s. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining recently due to pollution. In addition, the arguer reasons that Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. As discussed below, the argument suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands

First of all, the author provides us no information to illustrate that the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing. The author only points out the regulations of Tria do not ban fishing, which does not surely lead to overfishing. The argument does not provide us the concrete data of the amount of fishing—fish? population and the amount of fish which were caught. Perhaps the less fish population in certain time in this area is a normal situation because of the migration of the fish. Moreover, the author claims that the declination of fish populations does not attribute to pollution, which has no evidence. There is a possibility that the quality of water in this area are going to the bad—getting worse. Just because of this change, the fish populations are less than ever before. Without ruling out these factors, the author's assertion is wholly unconvincing.

Secondly, this argument is based on a false analogy. The author simply assumes that if Tria adopts the regulations of Omni's, the fish populations of Tria will have aninclination—increase?, and the marine wildlife of Tria will be protected. However, no evidence is provided to illustrate that these two areas are comparable. It is true that both islands are the marine sanctuary, but there exist我会用lie fundamental differences: perhaps the geographical factors of these areas differ from each other obviously and the economic circumstances also have some differences. So the legitimate concerns vary from each other. Therefore, though the regulations of Omni proved effective in protecting marine wildlife, there is no guarantee that it will work just as well in Tria island.

Finally, the author only claims that the best way to improve protecting the marine wildlife is to adopt the ways of Omni's, but no evidence is provided to convince me reach an agreement with the author's assertion. The author overlooks other possible factors which maybe more effective than this measure. For example, in the marine sanctuary we could not only ban dumping, offshore oil drilling and fishing but also could take some measures to improve the quality of the water and maintain the balance of the marine wildlife—biosphere?.这一点写的好我没有想到这层上

In sum, the argument is well-presented, but not well-reasoned. To strengthen this argument, the author has to provide us evidence that the two islands are similar in every aspect. In addition, to better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the relationship between the declination of fish populations in Tria and overfishing and pollution这句表达的有点奇怪可以换别的句式比如最后的 and 可以换成 as well as.

个人觉得你第一点和第三点陈述的比较好，但是第二点的语言有点混乱，可能是因为句式和一些用词的关系。另外，还有一些fallacy可以指出，比如 omni没有report但是不带表就没有 decline
最后就是要稍微注意一下全文的逻辑，最好可以是层层递进，而不是想到一点说一点，最好每一点之间都有一个关联词可以相连。

[ 本帖最后由 aija 于 2008-2-24 19:32 编辑 ]