argument177[0710G +U Aug小组]第1次作业 ldsun

ldsunUID: 2329026

In this argument the author suggests that nonresidents of Oak City's should continue to be kept out of Oak City's Civic Club. Those people, in the author's opinion, cannot understand the business and politics of the city while residents, who pay city taxes do. The author also cites a comparison with Elm City to prove that nonresidents would not be disappointed to this policy. I think those evidence exists several flaws and is unpersuasive as it stands, and I will discuss them in turn.

First of all, the club's major objective is to discuss local issues. People who only work in Oak City consist of certain may be big part of the city, they must be more or less get involved into those issues. If a decision related with nonresidents is made by club's member which do not have nonresidents’ attendance, it will be appropriate even unfair to those nonresidents. Give the club's objective, to exclude people who is not a resident but work there is an inappropriate suggestion.

Secondly, the author assumes unfairly that nonresidents cannot truly understand the business and policy of the city just because they do not pay city taxes. This assumption is untenable. Those nonresidents get their incomes in Oak City, and changes in the city surely affected them. Based on this consideration, nonresidents concern about the business and politics of the city as well. Without other direct information to prove this assumption, I am afraid I cannot be convinced.

Thirdly, the author makes a comparison with Elm City to show nonresidents' indifference, which is unreasonable. I am not informed that the two cities are identical to each other, so Elm City's situation lends no support to the suggestion. What's more, the fact twenty-five nonresidents' attendance is insufficient evidence to conclude that they will not be disappointed in Oak City. It is entirely possible that twenty-five is enough for Elm City, and they can represent them all.

In all, if the author wants this argument to be more persuasive, extra and detailed information must be provided.

狸狸兔兔UID: 2363162

TOPIC: ARGUMENT147 - The following appeared in an editorial in a business magazine.

"Although the sales of Whirlwind video games have declined over the past two years, a recent survey of video-game players suggests that this sales trend is about to be reversed. The survey asked video-game players what features they thought were most important in a video game. According to the survey, players prefer games that provide lifelike graphics, which require the most up-to-date computers. Whirlwind has just introduced several such games with an extensive advertising campaign directed at people 10 to 25 years old, the age-group most likely to play video games. It follows, then, that the sales of Whirlwind video games are likely to increase dramatically in the next few months."
WORDS: 384          TIME: 00:46:13          DATE: 2007-7-25 16:39:53

  In this argument, the arguer concludes that the sales of Whirlwind video games are likely to increase dramatically in the next few months. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that a survey shows that the most important in a video game is that it can provide lifelike graphics. In addition, the arguer reasons that Whirlwind has introduced several lifelike graphic games with an extensive advertising campaign directed at people 10 to 25 years old who are most likely to play video games. This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.
  First, it is unreasonable to draw any conclusion about all the game players preference based on statistics about this survey group. It is entirely possible that the most popular games are those interesting and easy-playing game, while the life graphics is not the key ingredient. Or perhaps most respondents were not 10-25 years of age. So the survey group is approximately not representative of all the video game players, the arguer's recommendation might amount to poor advice.
  Second, the argument assumes that no alternative means of sales decline of Whirlwind are available. Yet no evidence is to substantiate this assumption. Maybe it is the poor management or other powerful competitors that lead to the sales decline. Without considering and ruling out these and other alternative means of the reason for sales decline, the argument cannot confidently conclude that such new games can definitely shift the decline.
  Third, the advertising campaign may not be as effective as the arguer expects. The argument fails to offer any evidence to substantiate that there is a direct relationship between introducing advertisement and sales increment. We all know a lot of people are already tired of advertisements as they often boast and are usually not true. Even it is true, it is not likely that the sales will increase in the next few months as soon as possible. For that matter, perhaps the advertising campaign may be not that helpful.
  In conclusion, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the auger would have to provide better evidence to show the real reason for the two-year sales decline and all the game players’ preference. Additionally, I also need to know Whirlwind's introduction of its new games has occurred in relation to the increment of video-game sales.

vampirelqkUID: 2350379

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: 453          TIME: 00:32:13          DATE: 2007-7-25 20:59:00

In this argument the author claims that Oak City’s Civic Club should continue to be restricted to the city residents only, to prove his or her opinion the author advocated that only the city residents pay taxes and know how the best use of money will be. Adittionally, this restriction will not likely to disappiont the nonresidents as the author claims based on a statistic data. However the author can’t convince me since the argument committed several fallacies that make the argument groundless.
First, may the most important, the author takes the paying taxes as the only judgement that whether he or she can or can’t has the membership to the Club. Other alternatives are overlooked, such as the rapid development of the economy and industry are more or less due to the hardwork of nonresidents who work in the Oak City but live elsewhere. Can the City just omit them when count the residents of the City? Of course not.
Secondly, the author claims that only the residents pay taxes and know how the money do their best to develop the City? Does the residents play a important role in judging how the money be use as well as the authorities or they just have to pay taxes because the government make it a law that the residents must pay taxes regularly? Pay taxes can enrich the finance, and may be the medical care to the residents be better. Nonresidents can’t understand the business and polictics of the City, as mentioned above as a proof that subsidize the important of nonresidents, if lacking the convicing survey I won’t agree the author much. Is this because the government think that the don’t play significant role in the City’s development? The government should seek alternative educate the nonresidents, not just divide the citizen into two distinguish parts.
Restrict the membership to the residents only will certainly disappiont the nonresidents, rather than the author claims. The author uses a survey that in the last ten years the Club which has always have an open membership have only 25 percent of nonresidents. At first glance it seems convincing, but it can’t bear a deep thought. Who did the survey? How may nonresidents are in the City? 25 percent of the member can’t explain anything by itself, it is possible that less percentage of the residents attend the Club. Also ,ten years is so long a time that in the City developping rapidly. The survey may not well suited nowadays.
Since the author didn’t give detail survey or data on abovementioned, the argument can’t convicing me to agree the point. Before a conclusion is finally made, much suvey should take and more alternative should take into account.

vampirelqkUID: 2350379

In this argument the author suggests that nonresidents of Oak City's （去掉’s）should continue to be kept out of Oak City's Civic Club. Those people, in the author's opinion, cannot understand the business and politics of the city while residents, who pay city taxes do. The author also cites a comparison with Elm City to prove that nonresidents would not be disappointed to this policy.(改写较成功) I think those evidence exists several flaws and is unpersuasive as it stands, and I will discuss them in turn.

First of all, the club's major objective is to discuss local issues. People who only work in Oak City consist of certain (该去掉)may be big part of the city(citizen), they must be more or less get involved into those issues. If a decision related with nonresidents is made by club's member which do not have nonresidents’ attendance(文中只提到讨论ISSUE，未必是做重大政策决定), it will be appropriate even unfair to those nonresidents. Give（given） the club's objective, to exclude people who is not a resident but work there is an inappropriate suggestion.（多提点nonresidents 对于经济发展的贡献等）

Secondly, the author assumes unfairly that nonresidents cannot truly understand the business and policy of the city just because they do not pay city taxes. This assumption is untenable. Those nonresidents get their incomes in Oak City, and changes in the city surely affected(affect) them. Based on this consideration, nonresidents concern about the business and politics of the city as well. （补充点taxes不能完全代表对社会的了解及商业政策等）Without other direct information to prove this assumption, I am afraid I cannot be convinced.

Thirdly, the author makes a comparison with Elm City to show nonresidents' indifference, which is unreasonable. I am not informed that the two cities are identical to each other, so Elm City's situation lends no support to the suggestion. What's more, the fact （that）twenty-five nonresidents' attendance is insufficient evidence to conclude that they(改为nonresidents,that没有指代对象) will not be disappointed in Oak City. It is entirely possible that twenty-five is enough for Elm City, and they can represent them all.（多少人参加Oak City’s Civic Club文中未提，排除他们在外是否会有很大争议，Elm Club的特点是否不同，是否有别的调查数据证明类似Civic Club可忽略nonresidents?这点可做为补充）

In all, if the author wants this argument to be more persuasive, extra and detailed information must be provided.( 字数太少，可再引用原文句子，呼应开头段)

totalsm45518UID: 2286658

In this argument the author claims that Oak City’s Civic Club should continue to be restricted to the city residents only, to prove his or her opinion the author advocated(前面用三单，这里用过去时，不一致) that only the city residents pay taxes and know how the best use of money will be. Adittionally, this restriction will not likely to disappiont（disappoint） the nonresidents as the author claims based on a statistic data. However the author can’t convince me since the argument committed several fallacies that make the argument groundless.(很标准的开头段，可以总结模版)

First(我看一般都用firstly), may（这个may是什么作用呢？时态还是表可能？如果表可能，感觉就大大削弱了你的找错误的肯定性） the most important, the author takes the paying taxes as the only judgement that whether he or she（这里很容易产生歧义，以为这个指代前面author,建议换成one，简单还明了 ） can or can’t（与前面whether重复） has the membership to（in/of更合适） the Club. Other alternatives are overlooked, such as the rapid development of the economy and industry are more or less due to the hardwork of nonresidents who work in the Oak City but live elsewhere. Can the City just omit them when count the residents of the City? Of course not.（后面可以在加一句总结的话，更完整了）
第一个这个攻击点有点偏了，因为题目中并没有说是通过是否交税来决定能否参加俱乐部的，是否交税是决定他们能否真正理解城市建设，这是题目中作者的依据，iris这里把题目中的分论点与最后的总论点结合了，虽然也不错，但是不够清晰明了，而且，你后面的攻击并没有给出足够的理由来驳斥你的第一攻击点，所以有点乱了。Argument要最先攻击那种错误最明显的地方，建议iris在写之前列下提纲， 把题目中的因果逻辑思路找到，有的放矢。
Secondly, the author claims that only the residents pay taxes and know how the money do their best to develop the City? Does the residents play a（an） important role in judging how the money be use as well as the authorities or they just have to pay taxes because the government make it a law that the residents must pay taxes regularly（这里就有点啰嗦了，完全可以去掉） Pay taxes can enrich the finance, and may be the medical care to the residents be better（不太通顺阿）. Nonresidents can’t understand the business and polictics of the City, as mentioned above as a proof that subsidize the important of nonresidents, if lacking the convicing survey I won’t agree the author much. Is this because the government think that the don’t play significant role in the City’s development? The government should seek alternative educate the nonresidents, not just divide the citizen into two distinguish parts.
这个攻击点找得很到位，是主要攻击点，只是后面的论证有些零乱，看着不够整齐。应该说为什么nonresidents同样可以知道钱怎么用最好之类的，正反论证，效果更好。
Restrict the membership to the residents only（为什么用only呢？有什么作用？） will certainly disappiont the nonresidents, rather than the author claims. The author uses a survey that in the last ten years the Club which has always have an open membership have only 25 percent of nonresidents. At first glance it seems convincing, but it can’t bear a deep thought. Who did the survey? How may nonresidents are in the City? 25 percent of the member can’t explain anything by itself, it is possible that less（没有比较，为什么不用little） percentage of the residents attend the Club(这几句的用法都不太成熟，看范文中很少用这样简单的问句，而不给出明确的回答，这也是美国和中国的差异，还有只说少数参加，并没有说到最后的根上，应该是没有代表性，unrepresentative ). Also ,ten years is so long a time that in the City developping rapidly（这是个什么从句？没有看懂）. The survey may not well suited nowadays.
Since the author didn’t give detail survey or data on above mentioned, the argument can’t convicing me to agree the point. Before a conclusion is finally made, much suvey should take and more alternative should take into account.
结尾写得不够完善，还应该再具体点

总结一下吧，整体框架结构是成形的，开头可以看出是很典型很标准的开头，没什么错误
中间攻击点展开的不够好，建议你先列提纲，把要攻击的点列出来，再逐个具体攻击，一定要按照文中的逻辑关系进行攻击，不能想当然看到文中有这个论据而搭配不当攻击了别的论点，就适得其反了。主要攻击点确定后，后面的论述一定要围绕这个攻击点，正反论证都可以，切忌不能开头写了攻击点，后面又跑了
结尾也应该再正规一点，这样的结尾让人感觉你是时间不够，很草草结束了，所以会影响分数的
如果刚开始练习，可以不苛求限时，先保证质量阿

总的来说不错啊，继续加油，fighting！！！！

ps：我家的电脑有问题，不能给你换颜色，希望见谅阿
还有就是格式问题，拼写问题，这些都是最基本的，要避免马虎

ldsunUID: 2329026

怎么有这么多贴到我这里了啊，呵呵