arguement：论证分析

需要能分析作者的思路（作者会用不同的论据论证自己的观点）

gre：看中逻辑论证 用简洁的语言表达观点-指出别人的论证有问题

reasoning comes first

toefl：看中语言表达，用多样文字表达简单观点

wording comes first

arguement

文章框架：

introduction：

复述结论+归纳假设+论证+出论证问题

main body：

论证谬误1：作者观点+他错了+为啥错+总结

论证谬误2：作者观点+他错了+为啥错+总结

论证谬误3：作者观点+他错了+为啥错+总结

conclusion：

简短总结自己的评论

How to coompose the introduction?

The author claims that....

简洁的复述原文中的结论或主张

With the following arguements....

归纳原论述的假设和论据

However, the reasoning is ....

指出原文论证中的问题

        -------指出作者的论点

It is argued in the statement that +C

In the argument, the author claims/believes/states/holds firm to that +C

/*

eg：

        --------抄一遍：

the Mozaer school of music should be the first choice or parents considering enrolling their child in music lessons. 

        --------改写原文：

parents should prioritize the Mozart School of Music when considering enrolling their child for music education.

*/

         -------指出作者的论据：

To support her position, the author mentions /cites the following reasons and evidence：

          -------归纳总结：

On the one hand, the MSM welcomes all students with a wider range of courses offering; on the other hand, the faculty member covers many famous musicians and many alumni are also musicians with fortune and fame. 

全部抄写/随便抄写两个+ and so on

          --------指出作者的论证有问题

Option 1 : Howver, there are some logical problems in the author's reasoning that would be discissed below.

Option 2 : At first glance, the author's argumentation seems plausible to some extent. However, with a detailed analysis, the readers could still identify some logical fallacies that might seriously undermine the original chain of reasoning the statement. 

         ----------论点分析

· 真/假/好/坏/对/错

· 观点 态度 建议 倾向性 = 中心思想

· 先出现 “结果” clearly / thus / therefore / as a result / as a consequence 

eg(160）：

The author claims that using high-intensity lighting is clearly the most effective way to combat crime instead of using the money currnetly spending on picycle patrolsTo support her position, the author mentions /cites the following reasons and evidence: comparing the situaion in Believille and Amburg, using . At first glance, the author's argumentation seems plausible to some extent. However, with a detailed analysis, the readers could still identify some logical fallacies that might seriously undermine the original chain of reasoning the statement.

Intro 总结：

为了使开头的方式更加多变，我们应该熟记一下这些关键词并能够到灵活运用的程度，这样，再联系或者考试的时候，就可以灵活地写出自己的模板了。

------rest on, depend on, rely on , be based on

------however, nevertheless, nonetheless

------additionally, in addition, moreover, furthermore

------unacceptable, unconvincing, unpersuasive

------ungrounded, groundless, unfounded, unwarranted

------unsound, weak, unsubstantiated, flawed, faulty, fallacious, fallible, erroneous

------doubtful, dubious, doubtable, suspicious, suspect

------problematic, 

How to compose the conclusion?

Conclusively/ In conclusion/ Overall / at the emd of the argument / from the previous analysis / therefore/ in short / in summary . Accrodingly / all in all / to sum up

Main Body of Arguement

我要写的第一个段落-

             --让步--

我要写的第二个段落-

            --让步--

我要写的第三个段落

Analytical Reasoning Structure

正文的策略

主要是对原文论述的：

--论据

--假设

--中间结论

--最终结论

进行驳斥。

展开方式：

指出作者的思路，要读清楚作者是如何想要运用这个论据去支持论点的

指出作者的论据有一定的逻辑错误，或者作者在运用论据的时候有没有考虑周全

所以作者的逻辑错误在哪里，有哪些其他的可能性，在原论述的论证中加入额外信息加强或者削弱元论证

小总结：作者在这个论据的使用上有不当之处。

/* eg

Argument P3: faculty = famous musicians

1.分析作者思路：

2.指出作者的逻辑错误

3.详细论证作者错误

4.小总结

*/

Logical Fallacy 1: Causality（因果逻辑错误）

· over-simplified causal realation analysis

· 在statement中，会有两个facts一前一后或者同时出现，那么作者会认为这两个facts之前一定会存在因果关系，但是作者的这个思路是不对的。

--------一果多因

--------一因多果

--------无因无果

· 怎么判断：一定要结合论据和论点一起判断作者的强加的因果关系

/* eg160：

因果反驳逻辑错误：

B+HIL = VB decrease

1.分析作者思路：

The author unfairly claims that the installation of the high intensity lightning in the Believille should be the major contributor to the candalism reduction. 

2.指出作者的逻辑错误：
The author proposes here an oversimplified causal relationship analysis by carelessly or deliberately failing either to include other potential factors leading to the same consequences in the reasoning or to provide reasonable explanations for her ignorance. 

3.详细论证作者错误：

On the one hand, not all the candalism should happen in the night, some or many of which occur in the day time, when the lightning is turned off. Thus, the reduction of the candalism must result from other actions. On the other hand, it is quite possible that believille also intensifies the police power in the city and strengthens the penalty for crimes, which greatly helps the crime rates immediately. 

4.小总结：

As a result, the author cannot convince the public that the installation of the high intensity lightning indeed brings many benefits to the controlling of crime rates in Belleville. 

*/ 

Logical Fallacy II: Analogy（类比逻辑错误）

· 在statement中有两个完全不同的entities”A和B“

· 作者会简单地认为在A好的也可以用在B

· 作者就没有考虑到A和B是完全不一样的两个东西

· However, the author fails to consider that A and B should be two totally different entities. 

· 情况1：A和B是两个不一样的个体

· 差异性： differences between two individuals/ cities/industries/companies

                           ----when A and B are representing two distinct individuals, the author fails to justify her ignorance of the essential differences                                             between the two individuals. 

·情况2： A是个体，B是整体

· inapproriate generalization : a single selected representative may not display the mainstream characteristics of a group

                       ----When A is an individual but B represents the entire cluster, the author might have ignored that A might be not so representative as to cover/contain all possible characteristics of the cluster components, for some of those characteristics are mutually exclusive. 

·情况3： A是整体，B是个体

· possible anomalies: there should be no guarantee that one randomly selected individual from a group would deinetely follow the same trend 

                  -----When A describes the average situation of the froup while B is a selected inndividual from that group, we need to clarify that A represents mainly the average situation of all clustered individuals, and there is no guarantee that a randomly picked individual from the group would definetely reflected the same pattern/traits because it might be an outlier.

分析流程：

1.分析作者思路：作者认为B+L 好代表A+ L也好

2.指出作者的逻辑错误：A跟B是两个不同的个体，作者犯了一个类比的错误

3.详细论证作者错误：（B+L 好是因为B的某个特性。这个特性在A没有或者完全不同。而如果A在没有跟B有这个同样特性的前提下加了L，L则无效。）*1~2个能用来反驳的本质特性区别

4.小总结 以上理由可以看出A+L不一定好。

/* 160.eg

1.分析作者思路：

     Last, the author goes further by suggesting that the city of Amburg could refer to the high-intensity lightning in Believille to reduce vandalism. 

2.指出作者的逻辑错误: 

     However, the author does not consider that great differences may exist between those two cities, and such differences would weaken the analogy of the two.

3.详细论证作者错误： 

    Chances are that crimes in the city of Belleville mostly happen in the night time, and the propose of installing high-intensity lightning is to expose vandals. Yet, yandalism in Amburg may often occur in bright day light, so lightning at night would be rendered usless, which could also justify the initiative of employing patrols during the day in the first place. Furthermore, granted that vandalism happens at night in both cities, the well-disigned city layout of Belleville might facilltate the high-intensity illumination to prevent crimes from happening in some corners, On the contrary, the complicated road intersection and the comparatively tall and dense buildings in Amburg might create more shadows with the illumination, providing shelters for more criminal activities. 

4.小总结：

     As a result, the author cannot simply propose that Amburg should copy the successful experience of Belleville to control the rate of vandalism. 

类比反驳

1.分析作者思路：

2.指出作者的逻辑错误

3.详细论证作者错误

    It is highly possible that the customers of CC might already have developed the habit of listening to the radio for some consuming suggestions, but the other businesses might focus on totally different customers, who might either be those industrial companies or institutions or be those customers who go to other promotional channels such as TV or social media for consumption advice. 

4.小总结

Logically Fallacy III: Counter Arguing

· 反说

· the basis of such counter arguing is to identify how the author tries to establish the supporting relations between 

1.分析作者思路：

The author claims that the emplloyment of the police patrol bicycles in the Amburg should be discontinued because it only keeps the constant crime rates.

2.指出作者的逻辑错误：

However, the author fails to consider that the crimes would have increased, had the city not used such bicycles.

3.详细论证作者错误：

In other words, the bicycles did prevent the crimes from increasing and contribute to the controlling of local vandalism.

4. 小总结：

Thus, the statement that the bicycles should be discontinued could not hold water.

看到百分比想绝对值

1.分析作者思路：

The author says that 39% of MAC is surely greater than 29% of YC.

2.指出作者的逻辑错误：
Without considering / covering the calculationg basis, the author cannot simply make comparision between two percentages. 

3.详细论证作者错误：

Suppose, thae retail expenditure of the MAC should be 100 Euro, so the corresponding 39% should be 39 Euro, while the retail expenditure of the YC could be 10000 Eurom and the corresponding 25% should be 225 Euro. From such an analysis we could easily see that 39% is not necessarily greater than 25% percent. 

4. 小总结：

Thus, the author cannot justify her argument as she expects/wishes. 

结尾：

Accordingly,