[a习作temp] argument42 生态旅游FLY AW小组第五十六次作业 [复制链接]

xmbjowl
UID: 2182375

特级会员

Rank: 6 Rank: 6

声望: 0
寄托币: 1948
注册时间: 2006-2-4
精华: 0
帖子: 9

发表于 2006-7-25 11:04:23 |显示全部楼层

TOPIC: ARGUMENT42 - The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Parterre.

"In order to strengthen the lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Beluga began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Beluga’s main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign."
WORDS: 472 TIME: 上午 12:28:41 DATE: 2006-7-25

In the argument, the economic minister astonishingly deduces his recommendation advocating the ecotourism in the country of Paraterra on the basis of the fact occurring in Bellegea. However, the assertion, to me seems a sheer ramshackle one which needs to be scrutinized.

To begin with, whether the economy in Bellegea has been boosted is open to doubt. Neither the aims of the foreign visitors nor the reason why per capita income in Bellegea has enhanced is mentioned in the argument. On the one hand, as for the increased number of foreign visitors arriving at the main airport, it is entirely possible that the airport just acts as a transferring spot. If so, the travelers just stay in the country for several minutes waiting for flights, rather than paying a visit here. On the other hand, the author fails to provide the reason of increased per capita income. Perhaps this fact is due to the inflation nationwide, thus it cannot signify the economic boom in Bellegea. Or perhaps it is the local developed industry that boosted the economy, which brings about great profits to B, as well as enhancing the average level of the salary. Thus, without ruling out all the possible reasons, we cannot be convinced economic boom in B because of the claimed popular ecotourism.

Besides, conceding the success of ecotourism in B, what if the same strategy is used in P, a seemingly irrelevant country to B? I would doubt that the same scenario would work again in P, since the minister even does not provide any comparison in some critical aspects between the two countries. For example, the climate in P may be inclement, the places of interests there may be scant, and marketplace regarding the tourism may be not developed. Under such circumstances, however great efforts being made, the promoted ecotourism cannot draw any visitors here. In a word, lack such information mentioned above, whether the activity would also be applied to the country of P is dubious, not to mention enhancing the local economy just as the minister expects.

Even assuming the practicality and feasibility of the strategy, why should we hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign? The director may even be unfamiliar with the detailed nature condition of P. If so, despite his/her high ability in promoting ecotourism, his/her efforts may only be counterproductive and the campaign would not succeed as a result. Thereby, without sufficient reasons supporting that the director of B is competence and qualified as for P’s promoting ecotourism, the proposal seems unsubstantiated.

Simply put, plausible as it seems to be, the suggestion in the argument is unconvincing as it stands due to lack of sufficient and reasonable evidence, including the current tourism conditions of the two countries, sounder evidence demonstrating the economic boom in B, etc.