argu4<彼岸小组第四次作业> by melody-qu

melody-quUID: 2970250

The article posted on the real estate discussion site asserts that Adams Realty is better than Fitch Realty, and in order to sell the house more quickly and profitably, one had better choose Adams. The writer lists several reasons to support the assertion, however, careful examination of the evidence reveals that it lends little credit to the claim.

To begin with, assuming that Adams is actually better than Fitch, can we guarantee that the house will be sold quickly and in a good price?I think the answer is not. The selling speed and the price not only depend on the agency, more importantly, it depends on the quality and the location of the house itself.It is hard to imagine a house located in a remote area with little equipment and bad quality can sell a satisfactory price simply by the agency. We can see that even the assertion of the writer is right, the conclusion is unwarranted.

However, the prerequisite that Adams is better than Fitch rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and therefore is unpersuasive as it stands. First, there is no evidence that efficiency and quality of an agency are directed proportional to number of its staff and the time they work.Less people may cooperate better and part-time work does not affect one's good service and efficiency. More statistics is needed to show the individual performance of each agent instead of just the number of them.

Morever, addimitedly that the total revenue of Adams and the average selling price of it are all much higher than Fitch's, which seems as a favorable fact.Nevertheless, the writer fails to take into consideration that average high price of Admas' house does not equal to the fact that every house sold by Adams can attain high price. Several high price of  houses can rise the average price. What's more, the reason why Adams' revenue is higher may be it cut the spend of the agency rather than that it really earns more . Without comparison of locations, serving areas and cost of the two agents,it is incredible to deny Fitch's performance. Even assuming that Adams makes more money than Fitch last year, the situation probably could not last to this year.

Finally, the assumption that Adams sells faster is open to doubt. The writer does not describe the different conditions and location of the two houses, which is an influencing factor of the price. Given the second house is much better and bigger than the first one, then isn't it necessary to sell fast and well? As we all known, the real estate market is changing everyday and great changes must have happened during ten years. We have the reason to believe that the fast sale of the second house is due to a desperate demand of houses in the market instead of the agent's efforts.

In conclusion, the writer claims that Adams can sell houses better and faster on an untenable assertion, so that the claims risk many doubt. To bolster it the writer must provide clearer evidence that on the same conditions, which includes the house qualities, locations,market and spend of each agent, Adams performs better than Fitch.

McNeilUID: 2272415

Melody-qu A4
The article posted on the real estate discussion site asserts that Adams Realty is better than Fitch Realty, and in order to sell the house more quickly and profitably, one had better choose Adams. The writer lists several reasons to support the assertion, however, careful examination of the evidence reveals that it lends little credit to the claim.

To begin with, assuming that Adams is actually better than Fitch, can we guarantee that the house will be sold quickly and in a good price?I think the answer is not. The selling speed and the price not only depend on the agency, more importantly, it depends on the quality and the location of the house itself.It is hard to imagine a house located in a remote area with little equipment and bad quality can sell a satisfactory price simply by the agency. We can see that even the assertion of the writer is right, the conclusion is unwarranted.
（攻击前提，顺序很好，学习了）
However, （这个however转折上面的那一层意思呢？）the prerequisite that Adams is better than Fitch rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and therefore is unpersuasive as it stands. First, there is no evidence that efficiency and quality of an agency are directed proportional to number of its staff and the time they work. Less people may cooperate better and part-time work does not affect one's good service and efficiency. More statistics is needed to show the individual performance of each agent instead of just the number of them.

Morever(moreover), addimitedly（admittedly） that the total revenue of Adams and the average selling price of it are all much higher than Fitch's, which seems as a favorable fact. Nevertheless, the writer fails to take into consideration that average high price of Adam’s' house does not equal to the fact that every house sold by Adams can attain high price. Several high price of  houses can rise the average price. What's more, the reason why Adams' revenue is higher may be it cut the spend of the agency rather than that it really earns more . Without comparison of locations, serving areas and cost of the two agents,it is incredible to deny Fitch's performance. Even assuming that Adams makes more money than Fitch last year, the situation probably could not last to this year.（最后这个攻击很有逻辑）

Finally, the assumption that Adams sells faster is open to doubt. The writer does not describe the different conditions and location of the two houses, which is an influencing factor of the price. Given the second house is much better and bigger than the first one, then isn't it necessary to sell fast and well?（作者两处房子的具体情况的差异，我忘记攻击了，学习） As we all known, the real estate market is changing everyday and great changes must have happened during ten years. We have the reason to believe that the fast sale of the second house is due to a desperate demand of houses in the market instead of the agent's efforts.（这句话说的有点过于绝对了）

In conclusion, the writer claims that Adams can sell houses better and faster on an untenable assertion, so that the claims risk many doubt. To bolster it the writer must provide clearer evidence that on the same conditions, which includes the house qualities, locations, market and spend of each agent, Adams performs better than Fitch.
通读一遍有个感觉，就是作者有些过分强调了房屋具体细节情况没有给出这个攻击点，个人认为这个攻击点如果集中说明清楚，这样处理起来比反复再说给人感觉要好一些，仅仅是个人的感觉

我的水平很有限，欢迎讨论

banglowUID: 2969783

To begin with, assuming that Adams is actually better than Fitch, can we guarantee that the house will be sold quickly and in a good price?I think the answer is not. The selling speed and the price not only depend on the agency, more importantly, it depends on the quality and the location of the house itself.It is hard to imagine a house located in a remote area with little equipment and bad quality can sell a satisfactory price simply by the agency. We can see that even the assertion of the writer is right, the conclusion is unwarranted.
（攻击前提，顺序很好，学习了）--我觉得这个前提攻击没有道理，对于卖家，自己只有一套房子，题目里面的好价钱和卖的快慢肯定是相对的，欢迎讨论
However, （这个however转折上面的那一层意思呢？）the prerequisite that Adams is better than Fitch rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and therefore is unpersuasive as it stands. First, there is no evidence that efficiency and quality of an agency are directed proportional to number of its staff and the time they work. Less people may cooperate better and part-time work does not affect one's good service and efficiency. More statistics is needed to show the individual performance of each agent instead of just the number of them.

Morever(moreover), addimitedly（admittedly） that the total revenue of Adams and the average selling price of it are all much higher than Fitch's, which seems as a favorable fact. Nevertheless, the writer fails to take into consideration that average high price of Adam’s' house does not equal to the fact that every house sold by Adams can attain high price. Several high price of  houses can rise the average price. What's more, the reason why Adams' revenue is higher may be it cut the spend of the agency rather than that it really earns more . Without comparison of locations, serving areas and cost of the two agents,it is incredible to deny Fitch's performance. Even assuming that Adams makes more money than Fitch last year, the situation probably could not last to this year.（最后这个攻击很有逻辑）

Finally, the assumption that Adams sells faster is open to doubt. The writer does not describe the different conditions and location of the two houses, which is an influencing factor of the price. Given the second house is much better and bigger than the first one, then isn't it necessary to sell fast and well?（作者两处房子的具体情况的差异，我忘记攻击了，学习） As we all known, the real estate market is changing everyday and great changes must have happened during ten years. We have the reason to believe that the fast sale of the second house is due to a desperate demand of houses in the market instead of the agent's efforts.（这句话说的有点过于绝对了）---同意，攻击同时考虑自身语言逻辑

In conclusion, the writer claims that Adams can sell houses better and faster on an untenable assertion, so that the claims risk many doubt. To bolster it the writer must provide clearer evidence that on the same conditions, which includes the house qualities, locations, market and spend of each agent, Adams performs better than Fitch.
通读一遍有个感觉，就是作者有些过分强调了房屋具体细节情况没有给出这个攻击点，个人认为这个攻击点如果集中说明清楚，这样处理起来比反复再说给人感觉要好一些，仅仅是个人的感觉

我的水平很有限，欢迎讨论
----=============================
1.首先，前提攻击我觉得不是太妥
2.有的类似错误可以合并攻击
3.文章语言不错，值得学习

melody-quUID: 2970250

4# banglow 后来又和几个朋友讨论一下，这里攻击的这个前提的确存在一些问题，呵呵谢谢提醒！