Argument239 【challenge yourself小组】第三次作业

sabrinabaobaoUID：2515866

Argument239 【challenge yourself小组】第三次作业 by sabrinabaobao
The following appeared as an editorial in the local newspaper of Dalton.
"When the neighboring town of Williamsville adopted a curfew four months ago that made it illegal for persons under the age of 18 to loiter or idle in public places after 10 p.m.,. In Williamsville's town square, the area where its citizens were once most outraged at the high crime rate, not a single crime has been reported since the curfew was introduced. Therefore, to help reduce its own rising crime rate,. A curfew that keeps young people at home late at night will surely control juvenile delinquency and protect minors from becoming victims of crime."

文章的逻辑谬误有：

1.      混淆时间先后关系与因果关系，不能证明宵禁有效的减少了青少年犯罪；就算宵禁的实施的确有效，也仅仅是在宵禁时间内，有可能其它的时间段内青少年犯罪愈演愈烈，并没有在整体上有效治理，作者必须提供关于其它时间的情况

2.      广场一带仅仅是上报的犯罪事件为零，并不证明没有发生犯罪时间，作者在偷换概念

3.      即使承认宵禁措施对打击W小镇的青少年犯罪十分有效，但作者犯了错误类比，首先D镇的犯罪率很高吗？有实施宵禁的必要吗？其次，这里的犯罪只有青少年犯罪吗？禁止青少年晚上出来不一定能起到减少犯罪的作用。

The author in the editorial argues that the town of Dalton (D) should adopt the curfew forbidding people under the age of 18 to loiter or idle in public places after 10 p.m to reduce the rising crime, and claims that the curfew can surely control juvenile delinquency and protect minors from becoming victims of crime. To support the conclusion, the author cites that the youth crime in neighbor town Williamsville (W) dropped by 27 percent during curfew hours and in the town’s square which was frightening for the high crime rate before, no crime has been reported since the curfew was introduced. Fortunately, the argument suffers from some logical flaws and cannot convince me.

First of all, the author commits a fallacy of “post hoc, ergo propter hoc” in assuming that curfew in W is the cause of the decline in the juvenile delinquency rate, only because the curfew occurred before decline of the youth crimes. However the evidence is insufficient to establish the causal relationship, for it is also possible that the youth crime rate decreased as the result of strengthening public security by sending more police on patrol. Admittedly the youth crime in neighbor town Williamsville (W) dropped by 27 percent during curfew hours is the consequence of adopting curfew, it can merely proves that the curfew merely improve the public security after 10 p.m free from the youth crime, the argument lacks of the condition in the rest of the time. If the youth criminal rate declines at night while there are more troubles caused by the juvenile delinquency, the limitation on the young people is not effective. Without ruling out the other possibilities and provide more evidence to prove that the curfew brings out an overall improvement, the author cannot convince me that the measure is helpful and it is necessary to apply the curfew in D.

Secondly, the other evidence cited by author to prove the assertion is that after the curfew was implemented, there is not a single crime has been reported in square of W,  where its citizens were once most outraged at the high crime rate. However, the author confuses the definition of “no crime” and “no crime has been reported”. Does “no crime reported” means “no crime happened”?  Perhaps there were still many crimes occurred but no casualty or witness report the cases to the police station. Unless the author obtain the detailed conditions by interviewing the residents near the square, it is impossible to assess the argument by a vague survey and unclear concepts.

Thirdly, although I concede the implementing of curfew in W is successful and leads an overall improvement in public security and controlling the juvenile delinquency. The author unfairly assumes that curfew in W decreased the local youth crime rate can ensure the similar result in D. Obviously, the author fails to realize the conditions in the two town may be different. We can deduce that the W town took the measure of curfew is because the teenagers delinquency is major threat to local public order. Does Dalton suffer from a high crime rate? If the criminal rate in the town is high too, is the youth crime the main problem? Even if the crime rate is high in D, yet the town’s public security is threatened by the adult crime. It will not be effective to learn from the experience of the neighbor town without consideration about the local conditions; further more will make the residents’ daily life inconvenient.

In conclusion, the author fails to support his or her argument persuasively. To strengthen the argument, the author should demonstrate the declining of the youth crime rate in W is the result of curfew rather than other solutions and provide evidence about the similar conditions in the two towns’ security problem and ensure the feasibility of curfew in the Dalton town.

superjiang001UID：2300426

补交argu239：https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=863591&extra=page%3D1， 哥们使劲拍！

superjiang001UID：2300426

补交argu239： https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1
上次格式错误

superjiang001UID：2300426

怎么搞的，这回正确的
argu239： https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

tongdawpUID：2500696

The author in the editorial argues that the town of Dalton (D) should adopt the curfew forbidding people under the age of 18 to loiter or idle in public places after 10 p.m to reduce the rising crime, and claims that the curfew can surely control juvenile delinquency and protect minors from becoming victims of crime. To support the conclusion, the author cites that the youth crime in neighbor town Williamsville (W) dropped by 27 percent during curfew hours and in the town’s square which was frightening for the high crime rate before, no crime has been reported since the curfew was introduced. Fortunately（这个……是要表达什么？幸灾乐祸？）, the argument suffers from some logical flaws and cannot convince me.First of all, the author commits a fallacy of “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”（这个太帅了） in assuming that curfew in W is the cause of the decline in the juvenile delinquency rate, only because the curfew occurred before decline of the youth crimes. However the evidence is insufficient to establish the causal relationship, for it is also possible that the youth crime rate decreased as the result of strengthening public security by sending more police on patrol. Admittedly the youth crime in neighbor town Williamsville (W) dropped by 27 percent during curfew hours is the consequence of adopting curfew, it can merely proves that the curfew merely improve the public security after 10 p.m free from the youth crime, the argument lacks of the condition in the rest of the time. If the youth criminal rate declines at night while there are more troubles caused by the juvenile delinquency, the limitation on the young people is not effective. Without ruling out the other possibilities and provide more evidence to prove that the curfew brings out an overall improvement, the author cannot convince me that the measure is helpful and it is necessary to apply the curfew in D.Secondly, the other（应该是another） evidence cited by author to prove the assertion is that after the curfew was implemented, there is not a single crime has been reported in square of W,  where its citizens were once most outraged at the high crime rate. However, the author confuses the definition of “no crime” and “no crime has been reported”. Does “no crime reported” means “no crime happened”?  Perhaps there were still many crimes occurred but no casualty or witness report the cases to the police station. Unless the author obtain the detailed conditions by interviewing the residents near the square, it is impossible to assess the argument by a vague survey and unclear concepts.（这段论证很出色。）Thirdly, although（范文里常见的让步一般用even if，没见过用although的） I concede the implementing of curfew in W is successful and leads an overall improvement in public security and controlling the juvenile delinquency.（让步-推出错误，这个结构感觉就是有说服力；但让步中，I concede这个不好，不要出现第一人称，就说即使这个假设是成立的就行了。） The author unfairly assumes that curfew in W decreased the local youth crime rate can ensure the similar result in D. Obviously, the author fails to realize the conditions in the two town may be different. We can deduce that the W town took the measure of curfew is because the teenagers delinquency is major threat to local public order. Does Dalton suffer from a high crime rate? If the criminal rate in the town is high too, is the youth crime the main problem? Even if the crime rate is high in D, yet the town’s public security is threatened by the adult crime. It will not be effective to learn from the experience of the neighbor town without consideration about the local conditions; further more will make the residents’ daily life inconvenient.In conclusion, the author fails to support his or her argument persuasively. To strengthen the argument, the author should demonstrate the declining of the youth crime rate in W is the result of curfew rather than other solutions and provide evidence about the similar conditions in the two towns’ security problem and ensure the feasibility of curfew in the Dalton town.

指出错误以及驳斥错误都很好，而且每个错误的理由都非常充分。问题是：和上一篇给你改的作文一样，语言还是有点生硬，有几个地方是明显的ch-english，建议多看看范文，这个是大家的通病，我也愁这事呢，我记得新东方老师说过的，“要写就写别人写过的话”，才可能显得native，也就是模仿范文写；第二个问题是在列举多个论据的时候，缺乏层次，结构有点乱，解决这个问题就是在一段中多用各种连接词，我看范文里几乎句句之间都有关系，或者，最笨的方法就是只写一个论据，呵呵，显然后者不可取。

[ 本帖最后由 tongdawp 于 2008-7-31 23:52 编辑 ]