argument131 G-89-互助社-8月14日同主题写作 请拍

jason0926UID: 200697

131.The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.
'The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni.'



In this argument, the arguer asserts that the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing. However, this alone neither constitutes a logical argument in favor of the conclusion nor provides compelling support making the argument sound. The arguer ignores certain important concerns, which must be addressed to prove. In my point of view, the argument suffers from three flaws.

First of all, there is no evidence to show that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is due to overfishing. The arguer also ignores to tell the number of fish man and whether the number of fishing is still increasing or decreasing. Moreover whether the original fish population is numerous or rare, the arguer do not mention too. So it is hard to decide that the decline in fish population is the result of overfishing.

In addition, it also has no evidence to say that the decline in fish population is not owing to the pollution. Although the Tria's regulation ban dumping and offshore oil drilling with 20 miles, it is not confirmed that no garbage appears in this area. There is another possibility that garbage is drifted from other areas and pollutes the water. Moreover, it is also possible that some ships with oil has leak and the water of this area is polluted and leads to the decline in fish population.

Finally, because the situation between Tria and Omni is different, including different areas, different species of fish, different climatic, etc, so the method in Omni may not be fit for using in Tria. If there are huge number of fish in Omni while the fish population in Tria is rare, the method is also unuseful. Furthermore, whether has other plans to solve the problem about prevent the fish population from decreasing, the Omni's method may not be the only way to resolve the Tria's problem.

To sum up, though the argument seems to be plausible, in fact, it is neither sound nor persuasive. Not only does it leave out such key issues, but also cited in the analysis the evidence, which does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims. If the argument includes the given factors discussed above, it would have been more thorough and adequate.