Argument67 第14篇寄托四人组8月24日作业

哥哥家有二师兄UID：2124390

依旧是后补的结尾。。。
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分2秒     432 words
从2005年7月24日13时54分到2005年7月24日14时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a newspaper serving the villages of Castorville and Polluxton.
'Both the villages of Castorville and Polluxton have experienced sharp declines in the numbers of residents who pay property taxes. To save money and improve service, the two villages recently merged their once separate garbage collection departments into a single department located in Castorville, and the new department has reported few complaints about its service. Last year the library in Polluxton had 20 percent fewer users than during the previous year. It follows that we should now further economize and improve service, as we did with garbage collection, by closing the library in Polluxton and using the library in Castorville to serve both villages.'
------正文------
In this argument, by appealing to a brief analysis on the present situation in the two villages, the arguer recommends that to economize and improve service, they could close the library in Polluxton (P) and use the one in Castorville (C). Though this argument does bear some merits, a close scrutiny reveals it suffers from several critical falacies that undermine its creditability.

In the first place, the arguer fails to prove that the merger of the two garbage collection departments actually have saved money and improved service. No statistics are provided to show that there is a significant difference of the costs of garbage collections before the merge and hence after. Thus we cannot be sure the cost has been lowered. It is highly possibly that after the merge, the cost would be even higher than before because they have to purchase more trucks to run between the two villeages and to hire more workers to collect the garbage. Regarding the service, the author mentions nothing except that the new department has reported few complaints about its service. This is not convincing enough to believe there are actually no complaints. We cannot rule out the possibility that the service has been deterioating and even though some people may be dissatisfied with the service, they would rather keep it. Maybe someday they feel unbearable, they would just move out instead of making any complaint.

In the second place, there lacks of enough evidence to prove the library in P should be closed. Though last year the number of the library users in P has decreased by 20 percent, it does not necessarily mean it is seldom used. P could bear a large population and the number of library users can be quite great. Even if it decreased, there are still quite a number of residents in need of the library. Also this decrease may happen only during the past year and it may rise significantly this year. It would be unreasonable to neglect their needs.

Finally, the arguer commits the fallacy of false analogy in claiming the merge of the garbage departments and that of the two libraries are quite similar. The garbage collection and the library are quite different from each other in the aspects of daily running, the personnel management and organizations. It would be unfair to claim one can copy the experience of the other. It is unfounded to say that the library in P should be closed and moved to C just because the garbage department of P has been removed to C. There exists the possibility that the library collections, the staff and management in P is a lot better than C and the locals can keep the one in P instead of C.

In sum, the conclusion lacks validity because the evidences cited in the analysis do not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide more evidence concerning the cut of the cost and the improvement of the service after the garbage departments merged. In addition, more analysis is needed on the feasibility of the merge of the libraries.

bridgewalkerUID：208595

------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分2秒     432 words
从2005年7月24日13时54分到2005年7月24日14时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a newspaper serving the villages of Castorville and Polluxton.
'Both the villages of Castorville and Polluxton have experienced sharp declines in the numbers of residents who pay property taxes. To save money and improve service, the two villages recently merged their once separate garbage collection departments into a single department located in Castorville, and the new department has reported few complaints about its service. Last year the library in Polluxton had 20 percent fewer users than during the previous year. It follows that we should now further economize and improve service, as we did with garbage collection, by closing the library in Polluxton and using the library in Castorville to serve both villages.'
------正文------
In this argument, by appealing to a brief analysis on the present situation in the two villages, the arguer recommends that to economize and improve service, they could close the library in Polluxton (P) and use the one in Castorville (C). Though this argument does bear some merits, a close scrutiny reveals it suffers from several critical falacies(fallacies) that undermine its creditability. (模版基本定型了，呵呵~)

In the first place, the arguer fails to prove that the merger of the two garbage collection departments actually have saved money and improved service. No statistics are provided to show that there is a significant difference of the costs of garbage collections before the merge and hence after. Thus we cannot be sure the cost has been lowered. It is highly possibly(用形容词吧?) that after the merge, the cost would be even higher than before because they have to purchase more trucks to run between the two villeages(villages) and to hire more workers to collect the garbage. (这里用过渡词隔开更好些吧?) Regarding the service, the author mentions nothing except that the new department has reported few complaints about its service(适当改写一下). This is not convincing enough to believe there are actually no complaints(这里应该攻击程度，而不是是否有complaint). We cannot rule out the possibility that the service has been deterioating(deteriorating) and even though some people may be dissatisfied with the service, they would rather keep it. Maybe someday they feel unbearable, they would just move out instead of making any complaint. (关于complaint我觉得应该攻击其data是如何得到的，是否用survey科学的征求了opinion，department是不是self report，或者出于自身的利益而谎报。)

In the second place, there lacks of enough evidence to prove the library in P should be closed. Though last year the number of the library users in P has decreased by 20 percent, it does not necessarily mean it is seldom used. P could bear a large population and the number of library users can be quite great. Even if it decreased, there are still quite a number of residents in need of the library. Also this decrease may happen only during the past year and it may rise significantly this year. (最好给几个具体的原因，比如市民想看的新书图书馆没有购买、借书费上涨等等。) It would be unreasonable to neglect their needs. (还可以说说library shut之后，P市民借阅不方便，他们不愿意。)

Finally, the arguer commits the fallacy of(删然后+a) false analogy in claiming the merge of the garbage departments and that of the two libraries are quite similar.(这一句可模仿国外范文208改为：the arguer relies on what might be a false analogy between garbage department and library.) The garbage collection and the library are quite different from each other(凑字?) in the aspects of daily running, the personnel management and organizations. It would be unfair to claim one can copy the experience of the other.没有具体化，就没有说服力。Garbage车来回拉就行，library就要人自己来回折腾啦。一个library未必就够。其他的没想出来~ It is unfounded to say that the library in P should be closed and moved to C just because the garbage department of P has been removed to C. There exists the possibility that the library collections, the staff and management in P is a lot better than C and the locals can keep the one in P instead of C. (这一点不错)

In sum, the conclusion lacks validity because the evidences cited in the analysis do not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide more evidence concerning the cut of the cost and the improvement of the service after the garbage departments merged. In addition, more analysis is needed on the feasibility of the merge of the libraries.

(问题基本就是上面这些。另外，拼写错误注意一下。)