Introductory Paragraph
In this argument, the author concludes that… To support his conclusion, the author points out that… In addition, the author reasons that… Furthermore, he also assumes that…While the author’s argument has some merit, it suffers from several logical flaws that deserve our attention. /This line of reasoning is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.
In the first place, the major problem with this argument is that,
In the second place,
Last but not least,
Flaws in evidence
1. Vested Interest
既得利益，一般是第一个攻击点，后面用让步语气：即使它正确
eg（整体性：摘自广告媒体，只会说自己产品的优点，不会说缺点）: 12, 13, 15, 57, 65, 96
eg（局部性：report）:14, 70, 93, 998, 105, 110, 125，补11
We have strong reasons to question the creditability and neutrality of the survey in which the conductor has vested interest and, therefore is inclined to manipulate the figures to his own advantage/and therefore is prone to take the position to his own advantage.
2. Specious Evidence
eg: 9, 11, 12, 15, 25, 26, 28, 30, 6
To begin with, the statistics are intended to support the main claim that … But these statistics are vague and oversimplified, and thus many distort the state’s overall economic picture. For example, … Moreover, …at the same time… Finally, the poll indicates that … but fail to indicate…
3. Statistical Evidence
3.1 Insufficient sample
eg: 146, 115, 25, 98, 123, 134, 141
…might not be sufficient to gauge … that is, … Lacking information about … it is impossible to draw any reliable conclusion about…
3.2 Respondent
必须要证明respondents can represent the population
respondents 和non respondents可能有区别 eg: 8, 15, 115
注意
respondant还存在客观性问题，respondents只代表观点倾向，事实问题不能用这个调查
survey的备择选项一定要全面
survey不可叠加问题
eg: 8, 15, 57, 63, 82, 115, 141
A threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the survey. The author provides no evidence that the number of respondents is statistically significant or that the respondents were representative of A in general. Lacking information about the randomness and size of the survey’s sample, the author cannot make a convincing argument based on that survey.
Granted that…,
3.4 Vague Definition
3.5 Problematic Methodology
eg: 57, 63
3.6 Lack of Key information
3.7 Information too Vague
尽量少用
eg: 3, 15, 34, 82, 83, 103, 120
Fallacies
1. Fallacies concerning Generalization
1.1 Hasty Generalization (Insufficient Sample)
样本太小，小范围不可推及大范围
——这个小范围很特殊
——选另一个小范围和原来那个比较有什么区别
eg: 数量上推广：30 (more populated regions)，13 (Cumquat Cafe)，26 (Windfall)
eg: 范围上推广：8 (15% more residents)，112 (parents of first graders)
注意限定词的修饰
The argument assumes that A is typical of all AA, as a group. However, this is not necessarily the case. (如果是统计数据的话：One problem with the argument involves the cited statistics about A) Depending on the total number/size of AA, it is entirely possible that A, are not representative of AA, generally. For example, perhaps A… (A的特殊性) If so, then the conclusion that… is completely unwarranted. In fact, in the face of such limited evidence it is fallacious to draw any conclusion at all.
1.2 Misapplied generalization
common sense 不一定能推及小范围
eg: 71 (nation’s cities, our region), 103 (nationwide, our university), 33 (national unemployment rates, Perks ), 138 (nation’s top five, Gazette)
Although the author assumes that AA reflects A in general (A is typical of AA/AA applies specifically to A), it supplies no evidence whatsoever to substantiate this assumption. It is entirely possible that A… (A的特殊性) If so, the author cannot justify his/her recommendation/conclusion, at least not based on AA.
2. Confusion in Causal Reasoning:
2.1 Causal Over simplification
单现象A推出：Ａ－>B
——指出Ａ不是Ｂ的原因
——指出除了Ａ之外，还有其他原因导致Ｂ
eg: 47, 30, 46
In the first place, no evidence has been offered to support the assumption that the reason of B is A. While A is an important contributing factor to B, it is not the only such factor. Many other reasons ------ C, D, E ------ could jus as like account for B. Lacking a detailed analysis of the reasons for B, if would be groundless/flawed to attribute B to A. (While it turns out that B has nothing to do with A, then the recommendation will probably not solve the problem.)
2.2 Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (After this, therefore because of this)
双现象 Ａ—Ｂ 推出 Ａ－>Ｂ
注意时间状语词：since, after that,
To begin with, the author has engaged in “Post hoc, ergo propter hoc” reasoning. The only reason offered for believing that A caused B is the fact that the former preceded the latter. However, the evidence is insufficient to establish the claim in question because a mere chronological relationship is only one of the indicators of a causal relationship and, therefore, does not necessarily prove a causal relationship. To establish a general causal relationship, other factors that could bring about this result must be considered and eliminated. For example…. in addition…
2.3 Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc (Concurrence)
双现象 Ａ—Ｂ 推出 Ａ－>Ｂ
注意时间状语词，coincide with, so do,
eg: 13, 38, 105, 135, 124
To begin with, the author’s argument is based on the assumption/claim that A is the cause of B. However, the fact that A coincides with B does not necessarily prove a causal connection between them. Other factors, such as C, could be responsible for A. this is fallacious reasoning unless other possible causal explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C is the cause of these events or perhaps A is caused by D.
3. Other Fallacies
3.1 False Analogy
错误的类比类推：
Ａ有Ｐ的属性，且Ａ与Ｂ相似，则推出Ｂ有Ｐ的属性
——指出Ａ与Ｂ是有差异的，文中Ａ属性Ｉ，说明Ｂ没有Ｉ
eg: 1
注意修饰词：neighboring, nearby, on the next block
To begin with, the first reason rests on the assumption that A is analogous to B. But this assumption is weak, since although there are points of comparison between A and B, there are many dissimilarities as well. For example, I… These differences between A and B may preclude them from having a similar effect on C.
Ａ做了Ｔ得到Ｐ，且Ａ与Ｂ相似，则推出Ｂ做了Ｔ也能得到Ｐ
——双重攻击：指出Ａ与Ｂ是有差异的，并且P不是T导致的
eg: 118
3.2 All things are equal
时间层面：过去不等于将来
地点层面
错误类型：结论是prediction
eg: 15, 25, 9, 31
Finally, the author’s conclusion depends on the questionable assumption that the background conditions of … have remained the same at the different time/are the same at different locations. (Admittedly, had ten years elapsed the argument would be even weaker.)Yet two years/eighteen months is sufficient time for a significant change in the overall …, C, D, E. Lacking evidence that A would continue …., the author cannot justify its recommendation/cannot justifiably conclude that…
3.3 False Dilemma (Black-or-White reasoning)
错误类型：探讨either A or B, 推出结论
——A，B不互斥（not must exclusive）A，B可不可以一起做
——是否有第三个选择C
eg: 85, 28, 71, 134, 15
The author assumes that A and B are mutually exclusive alternatives and there is no room for a middle ground. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice. Both A and B might produce better results. Moreover, the author overlooks the possibility that C.
3.4 Appeal to Ignorance
错误类型：no evidence for A 推出 A错误
no evidence against A 推出A正确
complain题：
不投诉的人不代表满意(no evidence)
及时投诉率低，还是需要比较同行业的水平（参照对象）
真正投诉的人是核心客户，所以即使投诉率很低也不能neglect
eg: 10, 39, 110, 69, 123
The argument turns on the assumption that XX who did not complain were happy with … However, the author provides no evidence to support this assumption: lack of proof is not proof. It is entirely possible that many such XXX express their displeasure simply by not returning to … / It is possible that XXX are displeased but too busy to formally complain. Lacking more complete information about …, the author cannot assume that …
3.5 One-Sidedness
单方面分析，对一个问题，只针对它的优点，或只针对它的缺点。
错误类型：要做A，A有优点一，二，三
——要做A，条件是A的收益大于成本，或利大于弊
——列举其他收益或成本
eg: 2, 7, 42
eg(收益成本):24, 44, 102, 106
The author fails to consider benefits/costs A might bring. For example, … It may turn out that such benefits/costs far outweigh the disadvantages/advantages. Because the author’s argument lacks a complete analysis of the situation, the author’s conclusion/recommendation cannot be taken seriously.
Hints from Conclusion
1. One Sidedness
2. Causation
3. Sufficiency
recommendation 是否能充分解决问题
eg: 40, 88, 94, 139
4. Necessity
recommendation 是否是唯一的最好方案 false dilemma
注意 先攻击sufficiency,再攻击necessity
eg: 37, 75, 48
Content Paragraphs
Since the author commits the above mentioned logical mistakes and fails to consider the whole situation comprehensively, his ideas should not be adopted. The conclusion would be strengthened if he | 
