- UID
- 349308
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2008-6-14
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
A31
论据：P城的教育预算是B城的两倍，而两城人口一样。
结论：P城居民更重视教育。
我会有很多地方有模板的痕迹，大约就是模仿了简单粗暴argument那个的模板然后修改了点词汇和结构，不知道是否效果不好。
然后各位大神又在其他同学的文章里说结尾的部分过于单薄，目测就是我这样的=_,=。是不是要更具体的说明应该如何改进原作的argument?但是那些就算有不也应该在中间部分么。。
In the argument, the arguer indicated that Parson City residents place a higher value on providing a good education in public schools than Blue City residents. Even if this argument might seem convictive and undeniable superficially, it is still fallacious in fact.
First of all, the arguer assumed that Parson City has recently spent almost twice as much per years as Blue City has for its public schools, but there is no reliable data resource. We have to concede the chance that the fact that Parson citizen are more generous on education budget, but the arguer failed to offer enough and cogent evidence to support this rudimentary assumption. On the contrary, such a data might come from fake or malign rumors, to assail the Blue administration or require more budgets for local education department. It could be likely that it is possible that such an unwarranted anecdotal should not be trust without any convictive evidence. The arguer's reasoning is obviously flawed unless the arguer can undermine the possibility of feigning data.
Moreover, the arguer also claimed that Parson City and Blue City, shared the same number of residents, should spend the same or at least similar budget on education. Nevertheless, it is not completely sufficient and efficient to assert its validity; the arguer did not propose enough evidence to sustain the conclusion. Anyone would be easily to extrapolate that these two cities might at different economic level or even have different numbers of students, who would attend the local public schools. To illustrate it more obviously, a representative example would be presented to refute the original assertion. Considering the Boston and some city of the same population in Africa, perhaps the entire city budget of a under average developing country would be less than the Harvard. Without ruling out these exceptions, the arguer can hardly convince us to believe in the points of view in the article.
The last but not the least, even if the evidence could be able to support the previous assumptions, the arguer just simply assumes that the majority of fund to support education is only from government budget. But according to our common sense, this unwarranted assumption is fragile as well. It is reasonable to suspect that such an argument would not be persuasive at all. It is possible that many great successful alumni donate the fund of the local schools, especially those famous schools bred many giants, considering the experience from our own education development history. For instance, Yale University, or any other ivies, would be able to aid any freshman who cannot afford the tuition, since many formal students make her fund affluent. And the same situation happened on many public schools. So schools in Blue School might have been too rich to deserve more budgets from government. For this reason, the arguer must offer more evidence to prove that the budget is the only or at least the major resource of schools in these two cities.
To sum up, we could not conclude the Parson city placed a higher value on providing good education, since the reality of this argument mainly depended on impertinent evidence and unwarranted reasoning, while neither of them is cogent enough to support the argument. In order to demonstrate a similar conclusion, the arguer should present more convictive evidence, and take more possible circumstances into consideration. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-4-8 19:51:08
收藏
收藏
楼主
