Argument67【Triple Week】第1次练习by 八零年代的蛋

八零年代的蛋UID: 2660305

题目：ARGUMENT67 - 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."
字数：587
用时：00:59:03
日期：2009-7-12 21:23:01

Merely based on the unfounded assumption and dubious evidence, the statement draws the conclusion that they should close the library in Polluxtion and use the library in Castoville to serve both villages for further economize and improve service. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer points out the evidence that two villages recently merged their once separate garbage collection departments into a single department and the new department has reported few complaints about its service. In addition, he indicates that last year the library in Polluxton had 20 percent fewer users than during the pervious year.
At first glance, this argument appears to be somewhat convincing but further reflection reveals that it omits some substantial concerns that should be addressed in the argument. From the logical perspective, the argument suffers from four logcial flaws.

Firstly, the author falsely depends on gratuitous assumption that the sharp declines in the numbers of residents who pay property taxes is cause by poor service. However, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. For example, it is most likely that the enviroment in both Castorville and Polluxton do not adapt to people's living, or perhaps the numbers of crime in there has increased. Therefore, the argument is unwarranted without ruling out such possibility.

Secondly, The author claim that
the users of library in Polluxton will decline because last year the library in Polluxtion had fewer users than during the pervious year. This assumption is unwarranted because this rarely remain the same over extended period of time. There are likely all kinds of difference between library in this year and it in last year. For example, the library may buy more kinds of books or the library improve their surroundings. The comfortable surrounding will attract more readers. Any of these scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the claim that the users of library in Pollution will decline.

Thirdly, even if the users of library in Polluxton will decline, the arguer's recommendation relies on what might be a poor analogy between library and garbage. The analogy falsely depends on the assumption that the library's situation and the garbage's are similar. However, it is entirely possible that the numbers of library's users have no direct relation to the numbers of residents, not like garbage, it's also influence by the education level there and the economy level there . In sort, with out accounting for such possible difference between library and garbage, the auger cannot prove it will save money and improve service through close the library .

Finally, even if the close the library can save money and improve service, the arguer's recommendation is based on the assumption that no alternative means of saving money and improving service are available. However, the arguer fails to offer any evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. Maybe close the library in Castorville would be more effective to solve the problem. Base on the difference between Castorville and Polluxton. Without considering this means, the author cannot confidently conclude that library in Polluxton should be closed.

To sum up, the arguer fails to substantiate he claim that library in Polluxton should be closed for saving money and improving service. Because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the author would have to provide more information about the different level in economy or education in Castorville and Polluxton. Therefore, if the argument had included this factor discussed above, it would have more through and logically accept.

八零年代的蛋UID: 2660305

因为总结了个模板，边写边想写的慢，觉得有些罗嗦，高人帮忙看看那些需要删减的~感激~