3.6Argument177 [peresistence小组] 第七次作业~

cicicamusUID: 2347182

177. Membership in Oak City's Civic Club
1)       首先，作者提出非OC居民不懂这座城市的BUSINESS和POLITICS。但是他没有提供任何证据证明他的推论。很有可能非居民
比一些本地居民更加关心这方面的事情，或者他们本人就是商人或者参与了一定的政治活动，那么显然他们会比某些本地居民更能了
解当地的商政情况。
2)       其次，作者提出只有纳税的residents才知道如何使用这些钱来发展城市。这也是没有根据的说法。乔迁过来的外地居民可
以根据以前自己城市的经验提出一些意。取其可用之处，能对本地的发展有所帮助。自己关起门来闭门造车，很可能眼界狭窄。
3)       作者说这种限制不会引起外地人的不满，因为邻近城市虽然实行开放政策，但是过去十年中只有25名外地人参加了市民俱
乐部。这是个错误的类比。首先，25这个数字并不能说明问题。如果俱乐部成员有50民，那么25个已经占据了其一般的人数，不能不
引起重视。其次，就算邻近城市外地使命不关心，但是两城情况不同，没有证据显示OC外地人也不关心。

While the arguer appears to present several reasons that Oak City’s Civic Club should continue to restrict people who are not the residents of this city to join in, one would also wish to take this recommendation into account carefully before deciding.

To begin with, the arguer fails to provide any evidence that non residents of Oak City do not acquaint the business and politics of this city. Whether a person can know an issue well or not depends on his/her will, not his/her identity. It is entirely possible that many non residents are more concerning about the business and political issues of this city than the residents because they are businessmen or they are engaging in some political-related work. Apparently, these people are more familiar with the City’s issues than some residents. Therefore, the assumption made by the arguer is unwarranted.

Secondly, the arguer claim that only residents pay city taxes can truly understand how to use the money best to build a prosperous city. Again, this claim is also unconvincing. People who moved to Oak City from other places would make a comparison unconsciously between this city and their hometowns. They have a counterpart to find out the defects of the construction of Oak City which are possible more accurate than people live in one place all of their lives. Just as the old saying goes,” The onlooker is clear-headed.” With the experience of living in different places, they could table some wise proposals which are useful to improve Oak City. On the contrary, if people “building a cart behind closed doors”, they would be glued up their eyes and commit some evitable mistakes.

Finally, the arguer asserts that this restriction will not bring about dissatisfaction from nonresidents by citing the example of neighboring Elm City. It is said that though the Elm City’s Civic Club is open to anyone, only twenty-five nonresidents have joined in the last ten years. However, this analogy accomplishes nothing toward bolstering the arguer’s assertion. On the one hand, just pointing out twenty-five people taking part in the Club in Elm City means nothing. We know neither the whole number of the nonresidents in that city nor the total number of the member in that club. Supposing there are only fifty members in club, then the role of nonresidents could not be ignored. On the other hand, even if the nonresidents of neighbor city do not concerning about the city’s issues and are not dominant as supposed, it does not mean it is necessarily true in Oak City. Different cities have their own specific situations. Lacking evidence that conditions on these two places are relevantly similar, the arguer cannot convince me on the basis of Elm City’s experience that this suggestion does not lead to the discontent and disappointment of nonresidents in Oak City.

To sum up, the conclusion that made by the arguer is based on some false assumptions and a false analogy, which is unjustifiable at all. He should put some more reasonable explanations to substantiate his conclusion.

506  16:05-17:00 3.16.2008

ramboyuanboUID: 2444263

While the arguer appears to present several reasons that Oak City’s Civic Club should continue to restrict people who are not the residents of this city to join in, one would also wish to take this recommendation into account carefully before deciding.(可能过于简洁了，最好把作者的reasoning说下，让评卷人知道你已经弄清了arguer的推理思路。)

To begin with, the arguer fails to provide any evidence that non residents of Oak City do not acquaint the business and politics of this city. Whether a person can know an issue well or not depends on his/her will, not his/her identity. (有点chinglish,可以用rather..than..)It is entirely possible that many non residents are more concerning about the business and political issues of this city than the residents because(这里用because不合适，最好用if) they are businessmen or they are engaging in some political-related work. Apparently, these people are more familiar with the City’s issues than some residents. Therefore, the assumption made by the arguer is unwarranted.

Secondly, the arguer claims that only residents pay(个人认为最好改为现在分词啊，在我们不熟悉英语省略习惯的情况下) city taxes can truly understand how to use the money best to build a prosperous city. Again, this claim is also unconvincing. People who moved to Oak City from other places would make a comparison unconsciously between this city and their hometowns. They have a counterpart to find out the defects of the construction of Oak City which are possible more accurate than people live in one place all of their lives.(这个分析很新颖) Just as the->an old saying goes,” The onlooker is clear-headed.” With the experience of living in different places, they could table some wise proposals which are useful to improve Oak City. On the contrary, if people “building a cart behind closed doors”, they would be glued up their eyes and commit some evitable mistakes.

Finally, the arguer asserts that this restriction will not bring about dissatisfaction from nonresidents by citing the example of neighboring Elm City. It is said that though the Elm City’s Civic Club is open to anyone, only twenty-five nonresidents have joined in the last ten years. However, this analogy accomplishes nothing toward bolstering the arguer’s assertion. On the one hand, just pointing out twenty-five people taking part in the Club in Elm City means nothing. We know neither the whole number of the nonresidents in that city nor the total number of the member in that club. Supposing there are only fifty members in club, then the role of nonresidents could not be ignored. On the other hand, even if the nonresidents of neighbor city do not concerning about the city’s issues and are not dominant as supposed, it does not mean it is necessarily true(建议用the same) in Oak City. Different cities have their own specific situations. Lacking evidence that conditions on these two places are relevantly similar, the arguer cannot convince me on the basis of Elm City’s experience that this suggestion does not lead to the discontent and disappointment of nonresidents in Oak City.(最后句话表述有点不太清晰)

To sum up, the conclusion that made by the arguer is based on some false assumptions and a false analogy, which is unjustifiable at all. He should put some more reasonable explanations to substantiate his conclusion.

cicicamusUID: 2347182

多谢修改~我会好好看看的!辛苦了!:)