Arguement4 kito，来互拍，谢谢啦

leedgenUID：160823

4  The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.
'Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams.'
提纲：
1. Adams比Fitch有更多的estate agents并不能说明Adams比Fitch有效，很多时候小公司更有效
2.Adams去年的业绩高于Fitch，并且售价还高，但是光一年的数据并不能说明什么；此外两家公司主要处理的地区也未知，因此售价不具有可比性，这不足以说明Adams优于Fitch
3.最后作者自己的两次售房经验也不能证明结论。两次售房相差10年，并且两座房子所处地区也未知

In this analysis, the arguer tries to convince us that one of the two leading real estate firms in his town, Adams is more efficient and sells house at a higher price than the other one, Fitch. To justify his conclusion the arguer provides the evidence that Adams has more real estate agents than Fitch does and that the revenue of the former last year was one time higher than that of Fitch. Besides, the arguer gives a concrete example of his own experience to buttress the conclusion. After a careful consideration, we can find that this argument suffers from several fallacies as illuminated below.

The first reason that the arguer cited to support his conclusion lies in the fact that Adams has 40 real estate agents while Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. At the first glance this reason is convincing, but it could not bear further investigation. From this evidence can we hardly get any information about the work time per day and the efficiency of both firms. Lacking such evidence it is quite not warranted to draw the firm conclusion that Adams is more superior to Fitch. There is much possibilities that small firms work more effectively than large ones and part time agents are more effective than full time agents.  

Moreover, the arguer solidifies the claim with the evidence that Adams sold more homes than Fitch last year at higher price. Based only one year's record the conclusion is drew quite unsafely. It is high possible that Fitch has much more home selling record than Adams in other years. Another point we must look into is the areas that the two firms are dealing with. Are they both in denser areas in city or in remote areas? For the unit price is different between each other areas. Perhaps Adams deals with most properties in denser areas while Fitch in remote areas, and Adams may sell fewer homes at a lower price in remote areas than Fitch. Without ruling out such possible, the author cannot defend the conclusion that based on this evidence that Adams is superior to Fitch.

To further support the claim the argument the arguer gives us his own experience that Adams sells his home more quickly than does Fitch, the former took one month while the later took more than four months. However, the arguer overlooks the fact that there has been ten years between his two home-selling experiences and lots of things have changed in this long period. Maybe this time he listed the home with Fitch, and it will take less than one month to sell out.  Unless the author gives more evidence regarding the selling speed of both firms, he cannot rely on this limited anecdotal evidence to support the claim.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what the author maintains. To strengthen this analysis, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the work efficiency, the selling records of the two firms and we also need the comparative fact of the author's two houses.

[ 本帖最后由 leedgen 于 2006-2-10 09:21 编辑 ]

leedgenUID：160823

给点建议吧，谢谢

leedgenUID：160823

再来

kito9695UID：209685

seat！！不过等明天啦，表打我啊~~改你的同主题先~~

leedgenUID：160823

原帖由 kito9695 于 2006-2-10 21:55 发表
seat！！不过等明天啦，表打我啊~~改你的同主题先~~

:victory::victory:小别真是好人，来:hug::hug:

kito9695UID：209685

Arguement4 kito，来互拍，谢谢啦

4  The following was posted on an Internet real estate discussion site.
'Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams.'
提纲：
1. Adams比Fitch有更多的estate agents并不能说明Adams比Fitch有效，很多时候小公司更有效
2.Adams去年的业绩revenue准确的理解应该是收入，这里可以加入成本因素来考虑高于Fitch，并且售价还高，但是光一年的数据并不能说明什么；此外两家公司主要处理的地区也未知，因此售价不具有可比性，这不足以说明Adams优于Fitch
3.最后作者自己的两次售房经验也不能证明结论。两次售房相差10年，并且两座房子所处地区也未知还有房子本身的条件档次等

In this analysis, the arguer tries to convince us that one of 改成between更好一些the two leading real estate firms in his town, Adams is more efficient and sells house at a higher price than the other one, Fitch. To justify his conclusion the arguer provides the evidence that Adams has more real estate agents than Fitch does and that the revenue of the former last year was one time higher最好还是按照原文说的用last year than that of Fitch. Besides, the arguer gives a concrete example of his own experience to buttress the conclusion. After a careful consideration, we can find that this argument suffers from several fallacies as illuminated below.用了restate?

The first reason that the arguer cited to support his conclusion lies in我不知道这个词组用的对不对 the fact that Adams has 40 real estate agents while Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. At 去掉the first glance this reason is convincing, but it could not bear further investigation. From this evidence can we hardly get any information如果倒装的话是hardly can we get… about thetheir work time per day and the efficiency of both firms. Lacking such evidence it is quite not warranted to draw the firm conclusion that Adams is more superior to Fitch. There is much possibilitiesy用单数 that small firms work more effectively than large ones and part time agents are more effective than full time agents.  

Moreover, the arguer solidifies the claim with the evidence that Adams sold more homes than Fitch last year at higher price.主旨句应当一下点出错误才好，不要描述论据 Based only one year's record the conclusion is drew quite unsafely这才是主旨嘛. It is high possible that Fitch is much more home selling record than Adams in other years. Another point we must look into is the areas that the two firms are dealing with. Are they both in denser areas in city or in remote areas? For去掉 the unit price is different between each other areas. Perhaps Adams deals with most properties这个词是什么意思？ in denser areas while Fitch in remote areas, and 改成so thatAdams may sell fewer homes at a lower price in remote areas than Fitch. Without ruling out such possiblepossibility, the author cannot defend the conclusion that based on this evidence that Adams is superior to Fitch.这个句子语序有点问题，应该是the author cannot defend the conclusion that Adams is superior to Fitch based on this evidence吧

来个信号词，层次明显些To further support the claim the argument the arguer gives us his own experience that Adams sells his home more quickly than does FitchFitch does, . Thethe former took one month while the later took more than four months. However, the arguer overlooks the fact that there has been ten years准确的说是nine years嘿嘿 between his two home-selling experiences and lots of things have changed in this long period. lots of things可以详细描述一下，比如房屋市场的需求，整体房屋买卖的价格Maybe this time he listed the home with Fitch, and it will虚拟语气用would take less than one month to sell out.  Unless the author gives more evidence regarding the selling speed of both firms, he cannot rely on this limited anecdotal evidence to support the claim.你在提纲里提到的两个房屋的地理位置不同那些怎么没有些呀

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what the author maintains. To strengthen this analysis, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the work efficiency, the selling records of the two firms and we also need the comparative fact of the author's two houses.恩，结尾总结的很好，赞一个！！

这篇写得不错，没怎么改，呵~~