Arg-35
The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager:
"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
【满分范文赏析】
In this letter, the owner of an apartment building concludes that low-flow showerheads should be installed in showers on all 20 floors of the building in order to increase profits. To support this conclusion, the owner cites the fact that since installing low-flow heads in showers on the bottom five floors only a few tenants have complained about low water pressure, and that no other problems with showers have been reported. However, this evidence provides little credible support for the owner's argument.
【本段结构】
本文采用了标准的Argument开头段结构，即C—A—F的开头结构。本段首先概括原文的Conclusion，之后简要提及原文为支持其结论所引用的一系列Assumption及细节，最后给出开头段到正文段的过渡句，指出原文的Flaw，即这些Assumption无法让原文逻辑上没有问题。
【本段功能】
作为Argument开头段，本段具体功能就在于发起攻击并概括原文的结论，即为了提高利润，公寓楼所有的水龙头都应该采用节水淋浴喷头。本段接下来提到了原文中为支持之前的Conclusion所提供的证据，包括在安装了这些淋浴喷头之后仅有很少的房客抱怨，同时这些淋浴喷头没有出现问题。文章提及这些信息，为是在正文段中对这些Assumption即将进行的具体攻击做铺垫。
In the first place, the argument depends on the assumption that installation of low-flow heads on the first five floors has resulted in lower water costs for the owner. However, this need not be the case. It is equally possible that tenants on these floors compensate for lower flow by either taking longer showers, which would cause the overall water use to stay the same, or even increase. It is even possible that during the month since installation many of the tenants on the bottom five floors have been absent from the building. This could explain why, if it is true, that less water has been used over this brief period. And it would also explain why few tenants have complained.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第一个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。
【本段功能】
作为正文第一段，本段攻击原文所犯的第一个重要逻辑错误——因果类错误。原文当中假设，得益于这些节水淋浴喷头，用水量能够减少。但是，可能存在其他因素使得这一结果不会发生，甚至用水量会上升。或者，即便用水量的确下降了，这也可能是因为其他因素而非节水淋浴喷头所导致。因此原文的这个假设是不成立的。
In the second place, the owner ignores possible indirect consequences of installing low-flow showerheads on all 20 floors. For example, the more low-flow installations there are, the more likely that one or more tenants will become disgruntled and vacate as a result. In fact, the owner has admitted that at least a few tenants have complained about these new showerheads. High tenant turnover might very well serve to increase the owner's overall operating costs.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第二个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。
【本段功能】
作为正文第二段，本段攻击原文所犯的第二个重要逻辑错误——类比类错误。原文假设目前为止很少有人抱怨，这代表在今后所有的楼层都安装了这种淋浴喷头后，也会很少有人抱怨，然而事实可能恰好相反。因此，原文的这个假设是没有说服力的。
In the third place, in order to reasonably conclude that low-flow heads will reduce total water usage in the building the owner must assume that other water uses will remain constant in the future. However, this will not necessarily be the case. Perhaps the water supplier will raise rates, or perhaps other tenants who use more water will replace current tenants. Without ruling out such possibilities the owner cannot justifiably conclude that his total water costs will decrease after installing low-flow heads in every shower.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第三个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。
【本段功能】
作为正文第三段，本段攻击原文所犯的第三个重要逻辑错误——因果类错误。原文假设因为这种淋浴喷头能够节省用水，将所有的楼层都更换了这种喷头后，整个楼层的用水量就会下降。但是，原文作者忽略了其他的可能导致用水量上升的因素。所以，原文的这个观点是不能让人信服的。
In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing. To strengthen it the owner must provide clear evidence that the use of a low-flow showerhead in fact reduces total water usage. To better assess the argument we would need figures comparing water usage before and after installation over a longer period of time. We would also need to know how many apartments on the bottom five floors were occupied and using water since the new heads were installed, whether the tenants on these floors are likely to use more or less water than tenants on the upper floors, and whether the reduction in water pressure would motivate them to move out.
【本段结构】
本段采用了标准的Argument结尾段结构，即C—S的结尾结构。首先再次重申原文Conclusion是站不住脚的，接下来给出可以增强原文说服力的合理的Suggestion，包括原文作者需要进一步提供的证据和细节信息等。
【本段功能】
本段作为结尾段，具体功能即为总结归纳+提出建议。段落首先再次重申强调原文作者的论证不合理，接下来给出合理的建议：作者必须证明这种淋浴喷头的确能减少整体的用水量，在安装这种淋浴喷头前后长期用水量的测量数据，以及房客们对这种改变采取的态度和实际用水量的关系。
【满分要素剖析】
【语言表达】
本文的语言使用规范、清晰，词汇也用得准确地道，并使用多变的句式让考官读起来津津有味，这些都是
1) In this letter, the owner of an apartment building concludes that…(标志性的Argument开头段引出原文结论的语言表达形式。)To support this conclusion, the owner cites the fact that… However, this evidence provides little credible support for the owner's argument(标志性的指出文章错误的语言表达。整体开头段是标准的C—A—F的语言和逻辑模版体系。)
2) In the first place, the argument depends on the assumption that… However, this need not be the case. It is equally possible… that… which would cause… It is even possible that… This could explain why, if it is true, that… And it would also explain why…(标志性的存在他因而致因果类错误的语言和逻辑模版体系。)
3) In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing. To strengthen it the owner must provide clear evidence that… To better assess the argument we would need… We would also need to know…(标志性的Argument结尾段Conclusion-Suggestion体系的语言和逻辑模版体系。)
【逻辑结构】
本文的写作体现出了非常严谨的开头段—正文段1、2、3—结尾段的逻辑体系：
(开头段)In this letter, the owner of an apartment building concludes that…
(正文段1)In the first place, the argument depends on the assumption that…
(正文段2)In the second place, the owner ignores possible indirect consequences of …
(正文段3)In the third place, in order to reasonably conclude that…
(结尾段)In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing…
值得注意的是，在文章第二段对原文第一个逻辑错误发起攻击时，分别从正反两个方面攻击原文的Assumption。首先，“It is equally possible that tenants on these floors compensate for lower flow by either taking longer showers, which would cause the overall water use to stay the same, or even increase.”攻击的是“因为这种节水淋浴喷头，整体的用水量下降”这一假设;其次，“It is even possible that during the month since installation many of the tenants on the bottom five floors have been absent from the building.”表达的则是，即便承认之前的“整体的用水量下降”假设成立，但这可能是别的因素所导致的，而非“因为这种节水淋浴喷头”。这样的让步攻击能够很好地体现文章清晰的逻辑层次感。
