argument7

_xtUID: 2599830

TOPIC: ARGUMENT7 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."
WORDS: 332
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009-2-27 19:59:25

第一次限时，没写完...
The speaker concludes that the residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green of the Good Earth Coalition not for Frank Braun of the Clearview town council in order to solve the environmental problems in Clearview. However, I find the argument is flawed in several respects.

One problem of the argument is that whether the environmental problems cited by the speaker truly exists needs more careful examination. Firstly, the author fallacious assumes that more factories amount to more serious environmental problems. In fact, if those newly established as well as the already existed factories adopted advanced procedures to reduce the pollution to its minimization last year, it is possible that the pollution in Clearview was effectively solved to some extent instead of being serious. Secondly, the speaker fails to consider other alternative factors that may lead to increased air pollution level. It is possible that the bad air in Clearview was due to the air pollution in the nearby regions in that air conditions within a certain region is interactive with those in nearby regions rather than independent. The speaker may also need to consider that were there many people moved into Clearview? If it is the case, the increase of air pollution might be caused by the lager number of automobiles according to more residents, which was something out of the council’s control in a sense. Thirdly, the author assumes that the increasing respiratory illnesses result from air pollution, which is not substantiated in the argument. Absence of sufficient evidence, the assumption that the environmental problem exists in Clearview and has become more serious due to the town council is unwarranted.

Even if this assertion is justifiable, the deed of the Clearview town council does not reflect Frank Braun's own opinion. It is possible the motive of Frank Braun to run for the mayoral election is the awareness of the environmental problems and the purpose to deal with it. The speaker's assumption that Frank Braun won't protect the environment after election on basis of the behavior of the council is unwarranted. Also, we are not informed that Ann Green is an environmental-protector. Hence, the assertion that environmental problems in Clearview will be solved after Ann's election is unreliable.

In sum, the suggestion in this argument that the residents in Clearview vote for Ann rather than for Frank is unconvincing to me. To strengthen it, the speaker must provide sufficient evidence and data to substantiate that environmental problems are truly pressing and serious as the he scribes. He also must assure me that Frank is an environment-protector while Ann is not. To better support his suggestion, the speaker should consider other equal important respects of efficient leadership of a mayor accept for the environment protecting.

tanyujing2UID: 2600111

The speaker concludes that the residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green of the Good Earth Coalition not for Frank Braun of the Clearview town council in order to solve the environmental problems in Clearview. However, I find the argument is flawed in several respects.
恩，开头简洁~不说废话~偶喜欢！

One problem of the argument is that whether the environmental problems cited by the speaker truly exists needs more careful examination. Firstly, the author fallacious assumes that more factories amount to more serious environmental problems. In fact, if those newly established as well as the already existed factories adopted advanced procedures to reduce the pollution to its minimization last year, it is possible that the pollution in Clearview was effectively solved to some extent instead of being serious. Secondly, the speaker fails to consider other alternative factors that may lead to increased air pollution level. It is possible that the bad air in Clearview was due to the air pollution in the nearby regions in that air conditions within a certain region is interactive with those in nearby regions rather than independent. The speaker may also need to consider that were there many people moved into Clearview? If it is the case, the increase of air pollution might be caused by the lager number of automobiles according to more residents, which was something out of the council’s control in a sense. Thirdly, the author assumes that the increasing respiratory illnesses result from air pollution, which is not substantiated in the argument. Absence of sufficient evidence, the assumption that the environmental problem exists in Clearview and has become more serious due to the town council is unwarranted.

Even if this assertion is justifiable, the deed of the Clearview town council does not reflect Frank Braun's own opinion. It is possible the motive of Frank Braun to run for the mayoral election is the awareness of the environmental problems and the purpose to deal with it. The speaker's assumption that Frank Braun won't protect the environment after election on basis of the behavior of the council is unwarranted. Also, we are not informed that Ann Green is an environmental-protector. Hence, the assertion that environmental problems in Clearview will be solved after Ann's election is unreliable. 这一段你可以具体说说FALSE ANALOGY的问题

In sum, the suggestion in this argument that the residents in Clearview vote for Ann rather than for Frank is unconvincing to me. To strengthen it, the speaker must provide sufficient evidence and data to substantiate that environmental problems are truly pressing and serious as the he scribes. He also must assure me that Frank is an environment-protector while Ann is not. To better support his suggestion, the speaker should consider other equal important respects of efficient leadership of a mayor accept for the environment protecting.
啊，结尾有点小模式化咯`~
文法的错误不一一指出来了，很小的，注意用副词修饰动词~
总的来说我觉得第一次限制时间就已经很赞了~！！我没有一次写完了的。。。忏悔
还有，我觉得你驳斥的立场也很不错的，我的建议仅是参考而已，大家逻辑思维都差不多的~！