Argument26 Ares站队第一次作业 欢迎猛拍！

gamblerboUID: 2212217

26.
The following appeared in a memo from the chairperson of the school board in the town of Saluda.

"For the past five years, Mr. Charles Schade has been the music director at Steel City High School, and during that time the school band from Steel City High has won three regional band competitions. In addition, the quality of the music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments at Steel City High has improved markedly over the past five years. Because of such successes at Steel City High, the Saluda school board should hire Mr. Schade to plan and direct the general music education programs for the entire Saluda school system."
分析：
逻辑关系：乐队地区三连冠＋设备提高－》Mr. Charles Schade在Steel City High School是成功的－》聘请Mr. Schade
1，        Mr. Charles Schade可能是不成功的；
2，        即使成功，在B地未必成功；
3，        资金代价问题等；
习作：（没有限时，太长了！）

In this argument, several important concerns, such as the real reasons resulting in the three wins and the improvement mentioned above, the differences between the Saluda school and the Steel City High School and so on, which the arguer fails to address in the analysis, make the assumption that Mr. Charles Schade achieves a success in the Steel City High School questionable and seriously undermine the line of reasoning.

In the first place, the major problem with this argument is the problematic assumption that Mr. Charles Schade has great successes at Steel City High. Firstly, the arguer fails to prove that Mr. Charles Schade mainly results in that the school band from Steel City High has won three regional band competitions. In fact, there are a number of other factors leading to the three wins. For instance, the Steel City High school had recorded glorious achievements, such as fur more than three champions. Meanwhile, it is possible that the major cause of the achievement is that the members of the school band do their best to exercise day after day. There are too much possibilities that it is impossible to list one by one. Secondly, there is not sufficient evidence to support that it is Mr. Charles Schade that chiefly improved in the quality of the music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments at Steel City High. The only evidence offered in this argument to support the implicit causal claim that the improvement in the quality of the music instruments was caused by Mr. Charles Schade is the fact that the improvement happened to occur during his tenure. While this may have been a causal factor in the improvement of the quality of the music instruments, to argue that it is the cause without additional information and auxiliary hypotheses that make a causal connection plausible is to commit the “Confusing Cause and Effect Fallacy”. It is chief cause due to the improvement, in fact, that the school betters its financial status. Therefore, the arguer fails to convince us that Mr. Charles Schade makes a great contribution to the music department of the Steel City High School.

In the second place, another problem that undermines the logic of this argument is that the arguer ignores the differences between the Saluda school and the Steel City High School. Even if Mr. Charles Schade succeeds in the Steel City High School, groundless as we argue above, it is unwarranted that he will do the same success in the Saluda school. It is true that both the Steel City High and the Saluda are school, but even here it is possible that there exist fundamental differences. For example, while most of the Steel City High students are delight in music and good at playing instruments, few of the Saluda students and teachers enjoy music and the school band plays extremely badly. Furthermore, it is possible that the Saluda school does not have plentiful money to support the improvement of the quality of their music instruments. So the arguer does not provide so enough evidence that we have ample reason to suspect the argument.

Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary to point out several other flaws that weaken the argument. To begin with, the arguer does not offer specific and plentiful evidence about whether or not Mr. Schade is familiar to plan the general music education programs. If he does not have a good knowledge of the program, the Saluda school will not achieve its aim. Moreover, the arguer forgets to supply the information about Mr. Schade’s requirement such as the wage, the lodgings and so on. If it is too hard to reach his requirements, the Saluda school might give up the plan.

In conclusion, it would be necessary for the arguer to rule out all above-mentioned possibilities before we could better evaluate the argument.

时间：2006/06/19
总结：
1, 开头结尾尽量简洁（呵呵，我们开头没有做到！）；
2, 段段之间，句句之间最好链接紧密。

veinardUID: 2195006

In this argument, several important concerns, such as the real reasons resulting in the three wins and the improvement mentioned above, the differences between the Saluda school and the Steel City High School and so on, which the arguer fails to address in the analysis, make the assumption that Mr. Charles Schade achieves a success in the Steel City High School questionable and seriously undermine the line of reasoning.

我改的开头(In this argument, the arguer fails to address several important concerns such as the real reasons resulting in the three wins and the improvement mentioned above, the differences between the Saluda school and the Steel City High and so on. His ambiguous analysis makes the assumption that Mr. Charles Schade achieves a success in the Steel High School questionable and seriously undermines the line of reasoning.)  


In the first place, the major problem with this argument is the problematic assumption that Mr. Charles Schade has great successes at Steel City High. Firstly, the arguer fails to prove that Mr. Charles Schade mainly results in the fact that the school band from Steel City High has won three regional band competitions. In fact, there are a number of other factors leading to the three wins. For instance, the Steel City High school had recorded glorious achievements, such as fur (是far吗) more than three champions. Meanwhile, it is possible that the major cause of the achievement is that the members of the school band do their best to exercise day after day. There are too much possibilities that it is impossible to list one by one. Secondly, there is not sufficient evidence to support that it is Mr. Charles Schade that chiefly improved （in不需要） the quality of the music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments at Steel City High. The only evidence offered in this argument to support the implicit causal claim that the improvement in the quality of the music instruments was caused by Mr. Charles Schade is the fact that the improvement happened to occur during his tenure. While this may have been a causal factor in the improvement of the quality of the music instruments, to argue that it is the cause without additional information and auxiliary hypotheses that make a causal connection plausible is to commit the “Confusing Cause and Effect Fallacy”. （It is）The chief cause due to the improvement, in fact,( that) is the school betters its financial status. Therefore, the arguer fails to convince us that Mr. Charles Schade makes a great contribution to the music department of the Steel City High School.

In the second place, another problem that undermines the logic of this argument is that the arguer ignores the differences between the Saluda school and the Steel City High School. Even if Mr. Charles Schade succeeds in the Steel City High School, groundless as we argue above, it is unwarranted that he will do the same success in the Saluda school. It is true that both the Steel City High and the Saluda are school, but even here it is possible that there exist fundamental differences. For example, while most of the Steel City High students are delight in music and good at playing instruments, few of the Saluda students and teachers enjoy music and the school band plays extremely badly. Furthermore, it is possible that the Saluda school does not have plentiful money to support the improvement of the quality of their music instruments. So the arguer does not provide so enough evidence that we have ample reasons to suspect the argument.

Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary to point out several other flaws that weaken the argument. To begin with, the arguer does not offer specific and plentiful evidence about whether or not Mr. Schade is familiar to plan the general music education programs. If he does not have a good knowledge of the program, the Saluda school will not achieve its aim. Moreover, the arguer forgets to supply the information about Mr. Schade’s requirement such as the wage, the lodgings and so on. If it is too hard to reach his requirements, the Saluda school might give up the plan.

In conclusion, it would be necessary for the arguer to rule out all above-mentioned possibilities before we could better evaluate the argument.

时间：2006/06/19
总结：
1, 开头结尾尽量简洁（呵呵，我们开头没有做到！）；
2, 段段之间，句句之间最好链接紧密。


Veinard的读后感想：
1，        逻辑思路很清晰，第一段高度概括了整个A的flaws.
2，        最后一段是否有必要再扩充一下？呵呵。
3，        语言很棒，词汇丰富。佩服！
4，        有些句子太长了，不是很好理解。我想可以稍微改一下一些句子的结构，会更有说服力一些。