argument161 第一篇

gnomiUID: 150173

In a study of the reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.

161
In this argument, the author concludes that the respondents in the first survey had misrepresented their reading habits without doubt. To support the conclusion, the author points out that mystery novel was most frequently checked out in every public library. This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.

First, the argument provides no evidence to show that the two surveys were carried out in the same group of people.  Nothing in the argument assures that every respondents of the first survey had the habit of borrowing books from public libraries. On the other hand, the author did not show in the argument that every library visitors had participated in the first survey and even there is no evidence to prove that most of the book readers had attended it. There is the possibility that the two groups of people who attended the study were totally different. Therefore, the conclusion that the respondents in the first survey had misrepresented their reading habit is more likely to be invalid.

Moreover, we do not have any evidence suggesting that people who claimed themselves funs of literary classics would certainly borrow these books from public libraries. There are also the possibilities that these people enjoy buying their favorites at bookstores or read them on-line, as we all known that public library is not the solely source of books, and these factors were automatically neglected by the author. In the absence of this hypothesis, we cannot reach the conclusion that is mentioned in this argument.

Thirdly, the argument depends on the assumption that no mystery novel belongs to the range of literary classics, which is generally disproved. The objections of this ridiculous assumption are various, for instance, many of the mystery novels of ancient Greek and ancient Rome are also considered as literacy classic throughout the world; the Bible, which is obviously a literacy classic, contains hundreds of mystery stories. There are lots of examples like these to refute this absurd assumption.  Consequently, the result of the second study does not prove that the respondents of the first survey did not tell the truth.

In conclusion, the arguer fails to establish causal relationship between the studies and the misrepresented of ideas of the respondents. To reach the conclusion, we need more information to tell whether the result of the first study was critical.

imongUID: 140258

三个论点都不错，语言上有些地方不是太舒服，感觉有4分不过5分又稍微差一点点的样子...复习我的coherence吧  :D

例如第二段那个assure就有点不太好。需要加强的是transition的使用，还有我说到过的那个“围绕一定话题展开”。不妨也返回头看看范文。写得还可以了，尽量继续提高质量。

gnomiUID: 150173

3X  呵呵