argument37 unless 你砸我,I will have every reason to doubt my argument

ardorousUID：2115432

作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分2秒     256 words
从2005年6月17日10时4分到2005年6月17日10时30分
------题目------
Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.
------正文------
In this argument for supporting the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, for the reason that it is found in another village called Lithos ,an assumption demonstrated before as that the people in Palea are incapable to across the river –Rrim River. To further convince the conclusion ,the arguer provides us with another assumption that there is no need for Paleans people to come across the river, though the assumptions of question are superficially  correct , this argument is fraught with the mistakes ,such as false dilemma, oversimplification.


In the first place , the argument suffers from a false dilemma-the arguer simply reason that without a boat , people in Palea can not across the river ,under the reason of contemporary geographical condition .Even if the river seems to be deep and broad contemporary , but deeply considered, to the discipline of geographical transformation , It does not follow that thousand of years ago the depth of river had hardly changed compared to the present, unless the arguer could supply us with more precise researches on the geographical level , the evidence regarding the depth and the broad of the river may turn out to be invalid and ineffective .Moreover, the author simply thought only through boat can Paleans across the river , while, it is very likely that some other forms of boat-like inventions that will help people to across the river. Finally , the author hint that boat that can carry groups of people and cargo developed thousands of years after the extinction of Palea , but he fails to illustrate us the possibility of the there may lie some boats to carry solo person.


In addition , there exists another groundless assumption with a dilemma fallacy- the author innocently reasons if there is no material needs for the people to across the river , then there will be no other reasons for people to communicate with the Lithos, however , based on the understanding of the mental needs of the humans’ is the conclusion that people may have other desire need to be satisfy , for instance , on the side of the river there is a beautiful woman , while , on the other , there is a handsome man .They two fall in love with each other , to the human commonplace cognition , whatever hardship confronts before the two , they will try every efforts to reach the side of the other’s. Unless we are certain about that if there really exist any relationship or connection between the two place , both of which are unknown for this argument , we will have some reasons to advocate for the conclusion.

In sum , lacking the persuasive power , the conclusion is relied on gratuitous assumption , to strengthen the conclusion , we should figure out whether the river is truly the impede between the two village, moreover ,until the arguer could provide some complete research to demonstrate there is no communication between the two village, I would suspend my judgment about the reliability of the conclusion.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-7-22 at 00:06 ]

ardorousUID：2115432

d_messiahUID：177468

In this argument for supporting the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, for the reason that it is found in another village called Lithos ,an assumption demonstrated before as that the people in Palea are incapable to across the river –Rrim River. To further convince the conclusion ,the arguer provides us with another assumption that there is no need for Paleans people to come across the river, though the assumptions of question are superficially  correct , this argument is fraught with the mistakes ,such as false dilemma, oversimplification.


In the first place , the argument suffers from a false dilemma 我觉得你后面指出的错误更像是不完整思维,二选一的错误好象不是这么说的-the arguer simply reason that without a boat , people in Palea can not across the river ,under the reason of contemporary geographical condition .Even if the river seems to be deep and broad contemporary today , but deeply considered, to the discipline of geographical transformation , It does not follow that thousand sof years ago the depth of river had hardly changed compared to the present 感觉此句意思上有些问题, unless the arguer could supply us with more precise researches on the geographical level , the evidence regarding the depth and the broad of the river may turn out to be invalid and ineffective . 这里分析的好，不是简单的指出不足，后面跟的例子，值得学习，我也在努力的这么做，可总是在绕弯子Moreover, the author simply thought only through boat can Paleans across the river, while, it is very likely that some other forms of boat-like inventions that will help people to across the river. Finally , the author hint that boat that两个that离的有些进，不如改成which can carry groups of people and cargo developed thousands of years after the extinction of Palea , but he fails to illustrate us the possibility of the there may lie some boats to carry solo person. 后面说得除了船还有其他可能，要是能如前面一样给出例子就更好了，不过我也知道这挺困难的。


In addition , there exists another groundless assumption with a dilemma fallacy- the author innocently reasons if there is no material needs for the people to across the river , then there will be no other reasons for people to communicate with the Lithos, however , based on the understanding of the mental needs of the humans’ is the conclusion that people may have other desire need to be satisfy , for instance , on the side of the river there is a beautiful woman , while , on the other , there is a handsome man . 啥也不说了，这例子强悍They two fall in love with each other , to the human commonplace cognition , whatever hardship confronts before the two , they will try every efforts to reach the side of the other’s. 没船就过不去了，那他们怎么认识的呢，可见河不宽啊，正如前文所说，隔岸即见，不过，感觉你这里举的例子不是很合适的说 Unless we are certain about that if there really exist any relationship or connection between the two places小毛病 , both of which are unknown for this argument , we will have some reasons to advocate for the conclusion.

In sum , lacking the persuasive power , the conclusion is relied on gratuitous assumption , to strengthen the conclusion , we should figure out whether the river is truly the impede between the two village, moreover ,until the arguer could provide some complete research to demonstrate there is no communication between the two village, I would suspend my judgment about the reliability of the conclusion.


少见模版的痕迹，语言很少重复，我正在 努力的学习这方面
论证的展开很丰富，我很欣赏（有些臭P哈，我欣赏有个P用），我觉得这种写法比北美范文那种每段开头结尾一个意思说两遍，中间加点东西要好。不知道这点我么是否同感，从你的文章看，我觉得我们有同感
有时间帮我看看吧
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=303584

chengenhuiUID：200271

In this argument for supporting the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, for the reason that it is found in another village called Lithos ,an assumption demonstrated before as that the people in Palea are incapable to across the river –Rrim River. To further convince the conclusion ,the arguer provides us with another assumption that there is no need for Paleans people to come across the river, though the assumptions of question are superficially  correct , this argument is fraught with the mistakes ,such as false dilemma, oversimplification.


In the first place , the argument suffers from a false dilemma-the arguer simply reason that without a boat , people in Palea can not across the river ,under the reason of contemporary geographical condition .Even if the river seems to be deep and broad contemporary , but deeply considered, to the discipline of geographical transformation , It does not follow that thousand of years ago the depth of river had hardly changed compared to the present, unless the arguer could supply us with more precise researches on the geographical level , the evidence regarding the depth and the broad of the river may turn out to be invalid and ineffective .Moreover, the author simply thought only through boat can Paleans across the river , while, it is very likely that some other forms of boat-like inventions that will help people to across the river. Finally , the author hint that boat that can carry groups of people and cargo developed thousands of years after the extinction of Palea , but he fails to illustrate us the possibility of the there may lie some boats to carry solo person.这个逻辑错误只提到一句，感觉有点可惜，应该再写充分一点，以至于扩展成令一段。


In addition , there exists another groundless assumption with a dilemma fallacy- the author innocently reasons if there is no material needs for the people to across the river , then there will be no other reasons for people to communicate with the Lithos, however , based on the understanding of the mental needs of the humans’ is the conclusion that people may have other desire need to be satisfysatisfied ,这句话我好像没有找到主语 for instance , on the side of the river there is a beautiful woman , while , on the other , there is a handsome man .They two fall in love with each other , to the human commonplace cognition , whatever hardship confronts before the two , they will try every efforts to reach the side of the other’s.这个例子感觉不是很恰当。你这里说他们因为love而一定会渡河，但是应该在他们fall in love with each other之前，他们就应该见过面先了。所以两个村庄在这之前就有联系，而并非为这件事才建立的联系。怎么感觉我的逻辑思维现在也有点混乱了呢? Unless we are certain about that if there really exist any relationship or connection between the two place , both of which are unknown for this argument , we will have some reasons to advocate for the conclusion.

In sum , lacking the persuasive power , the conclusion is relied on gratuitous assumption , to strengthen the conclusion , we should figure out whether the river is truly the impede between the two village, moreover ,until the arguer could provide some complete research to demonstrate there is no communication between the two village, I would suspend my judgment about the reliability of the conclusion.

楼主的arg写的不错，语言和论述都比较精彩，而且得确没有什么模板的痕迹，这些都值得我学习。但是，我好像听说，arg一般要找出三个到四个逻辑错误，所以楼主只写两个是否少了一点啊？

ardorousUID：2115432

我的每个段，不是一个都只有一个错误，但是很多情况下，arguer会把接连的几个错误都发挥来证明一个问题，我就把它归纳了一下，还有把几个错误放在一起的好处是你可以进一步把逻辑扩大，example:even though ......,which is ,definitely, wrong, can not persuade us to further agree with .......,however,if admit it is right ..., then follows a situation that .....,while ,...
你可以在一个前提成立下不断阔展的

ardorousUID：2115432

某一年出现饥荒，颗粒无收，为生存而去
出现战争，逃命而去
为求进一步发展而去。。。。。

skaterUID：2116878

In this argument for（TO support） supporting the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, for the reason that( the arguer gives the reason that ) it is found in another village called Lithos ,an assumption demonstrated before as that the people in Palea are incapable to across the river –Rrim River. To further convince the conclusion ,the arguer provides us with another assumption that there is no need for Paleans people to come across the river, though the assumptions of question are superficially  correct , this argument is fraught with the mistakes(paradox) ,such as false dilemma, oversimplification. ( 第一段引用作者的论据太多了。一般的话只需要把作者的结论较完整的列出，而论据没必要都列出来。 主要把作者有失误，失误在哪几方面指出，并跟下面的分论点一一对应即可。)
In the first place , the argument suffers from（作者自己怎么会suffer呢） a false dilemma（还有你列出的都是新东方的错误类型，实际写得时候不要把错误说得那么笼统）-the arguer simply reason that without a boat , people in Palea can not across the river ,under the reason of contemporary（同时代的？） geographical condition .Even if the river seems to be deep and broad contemporary(contemporarily, 可是你最好不要在这么近的距离内用同样的词，显得词汇贫乏) , but deeply considered,(好别扭) to the discipline of geographical transformation , It（小写） does not follow that thousand（s） of years ago the depth of river had hardly changed compared （用change 时最好由可比的事物的两方发面来比。比如这里你可以说：it does not follow that the river was as hard to cross as compared ） to the present, unless the arguer could supply us with more precise researches(research 怎么能precise 呢，你可以说INFORMATION) on the geographical level , the evidence regarding the depth and the broad(WIDTH) of the river may turn out to be invalid （无效的？？）and ineffective（不起 作用的？？） .Moreover, the author simply thought only through boat can Paleans across the river , while, it is very likely that some other forms of boat-like inventions that will help people to across the river.(这句话太长了，整个段的层次很乱.注意安排整个段的论述层次。) Finally , the author hint that boat that can carry groups of people and cargo developed thousands of years after the extinction of Palea , but he fails to illustrate us the possibility of the there may lie some boats to carry solo person.（总之这段的论述很乱，希望你能认真分析题目中所给的论据的之间的相互关系。看看他们是层层推进的还是并列且有轻重之分的，然后再展开论述）

In addition , there exists another groundless assumption with a dilemma fallacy-（不要套用现成的新东方错误类型，最好把每一个错误都说具体。） the author innocently reasons（不要总用相同的词汇，比如：indicate,argue,assert….都可以用用看） if there is no material needs for the people to across the river , then there will be no other reasons for people to communicate with the Lithos, however , based on the understanding of the mental needs of the humans’ is the conclusion that people may have other desire need to be satisfy , for instance , on the side of the river there is a beautiful woman , while , on the other , there is a handsome man .（这个例子举的未免太有损你的语言质量和趣味，你可以说有可能两个地区的人需要互相学习新的耕种技术，需要引入彼此的作物。。。。学习纺织，铸造。。。。。)They two fall in love with each other , to the human commonplace cognition , whatever hardship confronts before the two , they will try every efforts to reach the side of the other’s. Unless we are certain about that if there really exist any relationship or connection between the two place , both of which are unknown for this argument , we will have some reasons to advocate for the conclusion.（你要支持作者 的conclusion??）(这段也是这种感觉，论述的很乱，而且我觉得你的语言实在需要提高，最起码要清晰明白。还有你的例子只能算是一种猜测，不能让人感到很有道理。你要想出真正有communication需要的原因，否则列举他因是没有什么意义的。)
In sum , lacking the persuasive power(power????)(evidence, investigation,…..) , the conclusion is relied on gratuitous assumption（注意作者绝对不是无缘无故这么说得，毕竟作者给了论据，只能说并没能完全证明，但无缘无故显然是指什么原因都没给） , to strengthen the conclusion , we should figure out whether the river is truly the impede between the two village, moreover ,until the arguer could provide some complete research to demonstrate there is no communication between the two village, I would suspend （insist on ,sustained ）my judgment about the reliability of the conclusion.(大的方面你只有两方面，如果想得高分的话少了点。另外，几乎每个论点的攻击都没有什么条理，希望你能做一些较大的operation.在整体上体会一下ARGUE的思路。其实跟辩论时蛮像的。多做写前分析比较重要。不要急于动笔。还有，希望你多写同主题的题目，这样可以参考大家的思路)

skaterUID：2116878

不好意思，昨晚改完了，可是断网了