Argument17 【0710G-小猪快跑小组】第2次作业 by guangxu

guangxu3559UID: 2311047

Argument 17
Words: 486              Time: 1 hour              

In this argument, the arguer concludes that EZ Disposal is better than ABC Waste and the Walnut Grove town should continue using EZ. To prove the conclusion, the arguer gives the reason that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once, EZ has additional trucks and provides exceptional service. In addition, he cites a survey result that 80 percent of respondents were satisfied with EZ’s performance. However, this argument suffers from several fallacies.

In the first place, the arguer settles a wrong causal relationship between the times of work and the quality of the service. Although EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC does it only once, this does not mean that EZ will supply a high quality of service and win more satisfaction. We can not get more information in detail about Walnut Grove Town, such as the population, the extent of modernization, the quality of the residents, etc, which are very important factors that depend the quantity of the trash there. If only one time to collect the trash can meet the need of the town, twice a week with a raising of month fee from $2000 to $2500 is just a waste.

In the second place, the arguer easily thinks that more trucks can also win more satisfaction from the town. Although EZ has ordered additional trucks, we can get to know that more service will be supplied to Walnut Grove town if it continues to use it. There is no concrete information to imply that the additional trucks of EZ will be used to Walnut Grove town. Maybe another branch of EZ is founded.

In the third place, the arguer does not give any information about the exceptional service supplied by EZ. Just by this simple reason, we can not be convinced. If the exceptional service of EZ has no relation to Walnut Grove town, how can the town benefit from it. We can not get any information about ABC whether it also supply exceptional service which can benefit Walnut Grove town even better.

At last, the survey result that arguer cites is not persuasive as it stands. The arguer only points out that 80 percent of the respondents were satisfied with EZ's performance, does not give more information of this respondents, which make the survey result has no significant statistical meaning. Maybe the persons that received the survey are all the customer of EZ. Under this condition, it does not mean that EZ supply the best performance, omitting the result that ABC receives 100 percent satisfaction.

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before getting the conclusion that EZ is better than ABC, the arguer must present more information about the condition of Walnut Grove town, the true useless of the additional trucks of EZ and the its exceptional service. In addition, the arguer also should give more information to strengthen the statistical meaning.   


Argument 47:
提纲：
1．  There are two may reasons given in the argument that cause the cooling, but no convincing proof are supplied that no other reasons can cause the cooling.
2．  The arguer denies the possibility of a larger meteorite that cause the cooling just because of no records about it. It is true that no record about it does not mean there is no proof to it. Maybe the records about the larger meteorite are lost. Even though there are no records about it, we can not deny the possibility of the larger meteorite because of the technology limit that caused people in the past could not see it.  
3.   The records about a volcanic eruption can not convince us absolutely. As knowledge of people in that period as limited to a very low level, it is inevitable that there are some mistakes in the records.

ldongxpUID: 2311083

In this argument, the arguer concludes that EZ Disposal is better than ABC Waste and the Walnut Grove town should continue using EZ. To prove the conclusion, the arguer gives the reason that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once, EZ has additional trucks and provides exceptional service. In addition, he cites a survey result that 80 percent of respondents were satisfied with EZ’s performance. However, this argument suffers from several fallacies.[开头简洁，good]

In the first place, the arguer settles a wrong causal relationship between the times of work and the quality of the service. Although EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC does it only once, this does not mean that EZ will supply a high quality of service and win more satisfaction. We can not get more information in detail about Walnut Grove Town, such as the population, the extent of modernization, the quality of the residents, etc, which are very important factors that depend the quantity of the trash there. If only one time to collect the trash can meet the need of the town, twice a week with a raising of month fee from $2000 to $2500 is just a waste.

In the second place, the arguer easily thinks that more trucks can also win more satisfaction from the town. Although EZ has ordered additional trucks, we can get to know that more service will be supplied to Walnut Grove town if it continues to use it. There is no concrete information to imply that the additional trucks of EZ will be used to Walnut Grove town. Maybe another branch of EZ is founded. [建议来句小结]

In the third place, the arguer does not give any information about the exceptional service supplied by EZ. Just by this simple reason, we can not be convinced. If the exceptional service of EZ has no relation to Walnut Grove town, how can the town benefit from it. We can not get any information about ABC whether it also supply exceptional service which can benefit Walnut Grove town even better.

At last, the survey result that arguer cites is not persuasive as it stands. The arguer only points out that 80 percent of the respondents were satisfied with EZ's performance, does not give more information of this respondents, which makes the survey result has no significant statistical meaning. Maybe the persons that received the survey are all the customer of EZ. Under this condition, it does not mean that EZ supply the best performance, omitting the result that ABC receives 100 percent satisfaction.

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before getting the conclusion that EZ is better than ABC, the arguer must present more information about the condition of Walnut Grove town, the true useless of the additional trucks of EZ and the its exceptional service. In addition, the arguer also should give more information to strengthen the statistical meaning.   

总的来说，逻辑、语言都不错
只是这个题还有个比较严重的错误——because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 ，
实际上并没有证据说政府是因为涨价才换公司的

shalonbasUID: 2184474

By Shalonbas

Argument17 【0710G-小猪快跑小组】第2次作业 by guangxu
Argument 17
Words: 486              Time: 1 hour              

In this argument, the arguer concludes that EZ Disposal is better than ABC Waste and the Walnut Grove town should continue using EZ. To prove the conclusion, the arguer gives the reason that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once, and EZ has additional trucks and provides exceptional service. In addition, he cites a survey result indicating/showing that 80 percent of respondents were satisfied with EZ’s performance. However, this argument suffers from several fallacies as below.

In the first place, the arguer settles a wrong causal relationship between the times of work and the quality of the service. 频率和效果不等同 Although EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC does it only once, this does not mean that EZ will supply a high quality of service and win more satisfaction. We can not get more information in detail about Walnut Grove Town, such as the population, the extent of modernization, the quality of the residents, etc, which are very important factors that depend 用determine更好点吧 the quantity of the trash there. If only one time to collect the trash can meet the need of the town, twice a week with a raising raise of month fee from $2000 to $2500 is just a waste.

In the second place, the arguer easily thinks that more trucks can also win more satisfaction from the town. 卡车数 Although EZ has ordered additional trucks, we can 看了几遍，觉得这里是不是少写了个not?很小的问题，但后果严重啊，呵呵 get to know that more service will be supplied to Walnut Grove town if it continues to use it. There is no concrete information to imply that the additional trucks of EZ will be used to Walnut Grove town. Maybe another branch of EZ is founded.

In the third place, the arguer does not give any information about the exceptional service supplied by EZ. 我觉得这个观点有些牵强，作者提供survey就是为了证明其服务好的，这里却说作者一点都没给，不大合适。 Just by this simple reason, we can not be convinced. If the exceptional service of EZ has no relation to Walnut Grove town, how can the town benefit from it. We can not get any information about ABC whether it also supply exceptional service which can benefit Walnut Grove town even better.

At last, the survey result that arguer cites is not persuasive as it stands. 嗯，这里攻击survey了，所以我的感觉是上面一段最好不要，有些内容可以合并到下面来。 The arguer only points out that 80 percent of the respondents were satisfied with EZ's performance, does not give more information of this respondents, which make the survey result has no 少关联词 significant statistical meaning. Maybe the persons that received the survey are all the customer of EZ. Under this condition, it does not mean that EZ supply the best performance, omitting the result that ABC receives 100 percent satisfaction. 这一句加个might，perhaps，possible之类的词可能更好

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before getting the conclusion that EZ is better than ABC, the arguer must present more information about the condition of Walnut Grove town, the true useless 用途？useless?错了吧，use is OK of the additional trucks of EZ and the its exceptional service. In addition, the arguer also should give more information to strengthen the statistical meaning.

思路和逻辑暂时先不做评价，因为我自己也不太确定，呵呵。当时我建议布置这个作业就是觉得该Argu算是大家提及次数多，争议比较大的题目。版上有许多牛人争论过，guangxu可以参考参考先，呵呵。地址如下：
1: Argument就应该这样写（二）
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... type%26typeid%3D100
2：Argument就应该这样写(二)吗
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=533374

至于语言嘛，第一，字数够了；第二，话说到位了；第三，不足的地方是对从句的使用不是很熟练，而且每当要在一个句子中并列两个分句时总是不加关联词，呵呵。