Argument117【0706G－~4而后生~小组】第5次作业 inside

insideUID: 2303230

TOPIC: ARGUMENT177 - The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.

"Membership in Oak City's Civic Club-a club whose primary objective is to discuss local issues-should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of the city. It is important to restrict membership to city residents because only residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could best be used to improve the city. At any rate, restricting membership in this way is unlikely to disappoint many of the nonresidents employed in Oak City, since neighboring Elm City's Civic Club has always had an open membership policy, and only twenty-five nonresidents have joined Elm City's Club in the last ten years."
WORDS: 463          TIME: 0:45:00          DATE: 2007-3-19

In order to conclude that membership in Oak City's Civic Club should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City, the arguer poses some evidence, including some logical analyses, an analogy to the Elm City's Civic Club. However, I should indicate that these evidence are not strong enough to support the conclusion.

First of all, it is quite unpersuasive to say that people who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of the city. It is the mind and intelligence, rather than the living location, that will determine one's comprehension of the business and politics of the city. Some nonresident white-collars, who are among the upper-class of the city, might understand the city deeply, and some nonresident professionals, who are teaching in local universities, might have some direct some studies about the business and politics of the city and therefore enjoy more knowledge about it.

Another explanation that only residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could best be used to improve the city, posed by the arguer in order to prove the importance of restrict membership, is unconvincing. It is true that the residents pay city taxes, but what about other taxes? As we all know, everyone that hold a car should pay the car tax no matter whether he/she is a resident, and everyone that get salaries from a corporation, should pay the property tax no matter if he/she lives in the city. These individuals all have responsibility to discuss the local issue that about their tax or other things that have relationship with them. Moreover, do the residents understand how the money could best be used?
Maybe some nonresidents mentioned in the second paragraph, who have great ability, will know how to utilize money to improve the city.

The analogy to Elm City's Civic Club may be another fallacy for the reason that the conditions of the two cities might be quite different. For instance, the proportion and aggregate population of nonresidents in the two cities may differ considerably. It is likely that there is only few nonresident in Elm City so that the 25 of them, who have joined its Civic Club, although seems to be quite few, may actually occupy a big proportion, while Oak city might be a truly immigration city where the nonresidents take 50% or even more of its population, so that if none of them have been included into the Civic Club, they will disappoint. Furthermore, it is also probable that the nonresident in Elm City are not so willing to discuss the city's issue, while the nonresident in Oak City, on the contrary, behave active. Hence, we could not judge whether the nonresident of Oak city will disappoint on the analogy of Elm City.

To sum up, the arguer does not adequately demonstrate the necessity of the membership restriction for the reason aforementioned, so we can hardly accept his conclusion.


第一次限时做，限了45分钟。。。以前写一篇A都是近一个半小时的哈。。。

napUID: 196976

感觉一定很爽，不过得让我来看看
TOPIC: ARGUMENT177 - The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.

"Membership in Oak City'sCivic Club-a club whose primary objective is to discuss localissues-should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City.People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot trulyunderstand the business and politics of the city. It is important torestrict membership to city residents because only residents pay citytaxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could bestbe used to improve the city. At any rate, restricting membership inthis way is unlikely to disappoint many of the nonresidents employed inOak City, since neighboring Elm City's Civic Club has always had anopen membership policy, and only twenty-five nonresidents have joinedElm City's Club in the last ten years."
WORDS: 463          TIME: 0:45:00(下次限制在30mins)          DATE: 2007-3-19

In order to conclude thatmembership in Oak City's Civic Club should continue to be restricted topeople who live in Oak City, the arguer poses some evidence, includingsome logical analyses, an analogy to the Elm City's Civic Club.However, I should indicate that these evidence are not strong enough tosupport the conclusion.

First of all, it is quiteunpersuasive to say that people who work in Oak City but who(好象这个who能省略) liveelsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of thecity. It is the mind and intelligence(稍微qualify一下), rather than the living location,that will determine one's comprehension of the business and politics ofthe city. Some nonresident white-collars, who are among the upper-classof the city, might understand the city deeply(why? just to be upper-class of the city?), and some nonresidentprofessionals, who are teaching in local universities, might have somedirect some studies about the business and politics of the city andtherefore enjoy more knowledge about it(这个有reason).

Another explanation thatonly residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understandhow the money could best be used to improve the city, posed by thearguer in order to prove the importance of restrict membership, isunconvincing. It is true that the residents pay city taxes, but whatabout other taxes?(最好前面说一下上其他类税的人会关心economics and politics，否则这样一路推导然后总结结论会让人晕过去的) As we all know, everyone that hold a car should paythe car tax no matter whether he/she is a resident, and everyone thatget salaries from a corporation, should pay the property tax no matterif he/she lives in the city. These individuals all have responsibilityto discuss the local issue that about their tax or other things thathave relationship with them. Moreover, do the residents understand howthe money could best be(be best?这个我也不知道) used? Maybe some nonresidentsmentioned in the second paragraph, who have great ability, will knowhow to utilize money to improve the city.

The analogy to Elm City'sCivic Club may be another fallacy for the reason that the conditions ofthe two cities might be quite different. For instance, the proportionand aggregate population of nonresidents in the two cities may differconsiderably. It is likely that there is only few nonresident in ElmCity so that the 25 of them, who have joined its Civic Club, althoughseems to be quite few, may actually occupy a big proportion, while Oakcity might be a truly immigration city where the nonresidents take 50%or even more of its population, so that if none of them have beenincluded into the Civic Club, they will disappoint. Furthermore, it isalso probable that the nonresident in Elm City are not so willing todiscuss the city's issue, while the nonresident in Oak City, on thecontrary, behave active. Hence, we could not judge whether thenonresident of Oak city will disappoint on the analogy of Elm City.
(这段论证得不错)

To sum up, the arguer doesnot adequately demonstrate the necessity of the membership restrictionfor the reason aforementioned, so we can hardly accept his conclusion.

看不出什么太大的错误
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=629821

hezhifei2008UID: 2233976

1。我也同意楼上关于白领的疑问，看上去有点歧视色彩，实话也不能说阿。
2。第三段后的moreover后话的有点意犹未尽。
3。个人不太喜欢对税的种类较真。
4。总体还可以。

[ 本帖最后由 hezhifei2008 于 2007-3-21 21:26 编辑 ]