Argument 3 范例

tesolchina_RAUID：3675555

Argument 3/171
Arg 3skateboarding in Central Plaza

3) The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.

Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

171) The following appeared as a letter to the editor from the owner of a skate shop in Central Plaza.

Two years ago the city voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for the litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there has only been a small increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and litter and vandalism are still problematic. Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. In order to restore Central Plaza to its former glory, then, we recommend that the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.



G1: Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically.

C1: Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza.

G2: There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza.

C2: Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels.



X causes a problem, so lets get rid of X.


G1 C1

G2(C3)

(C1,C3)  C2

A1(G1,C1): Popularity of skateboarding is the main reason why the number of shoppers decreased. (C1- X and Y occur together X causes Y)

A2(G2,C3):Popularity of skateboarding is the main reason why litter and vandalism increased. (C1- X and Y occur together X causes Y)

A3 (C2): It is feasible to prohibit skateboarding. (feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the proposed policy)



What are the reasons why people do not come to Central Plaza?

What are the reasons why the business decreased in Central Plaza?

What are the causes of litter and vandalism?

Can skateboarding be effectively prohibited? What will happen if it is prohibited.

In this letter, it is recommended that skateboarding should be prohibited in order to resume the popularity and business activities in Central Plaza. A number of questions about why people do not shop as much in Central Plaza as before, the causes of litter and vandalism and the feasibility and consequences of prohibiting skateboarding need to be answered in order to evaluate

The first question we need to investigate is why shoppers came to the Central Plaza less often and spent less money here. It is assumed in the argument that skateboarding was the main reason. But we need more information about shoppers attitudes towards skateboarding and whether or not skateboarding had been a hassle to the shoppers and shop owners here. Maybe the decline of popularity and business was due to the relatively high prices of the goods sold in Central Plaza or the opening of a fancier shopping mall in the region. If that was the case, prohibiting skateboarding would not improve the situation.

It may be safe to assume that litter and vandalism compromise the shopping experiences at Central Plaza and partially lead to the reduction of business. But we need more evidence about who were responsible for such socially unacceptable or illegal activities. It is not fair to assume that skateboarders were the people engaged in littering and/or vandalism. Again, if littering and vandalism were done by a different group of people, the recommendation would not lead to desired outcome.

The final issue we need to address is whether skateboarding could be effectively prohibited and what would happen after prohibition. If the children engaged in skateboarding were so enthusiastic about the sports, prohibiting it may cost too much manpower and lead to conflicts between the skateboarders and the security guards that may drive away more shoppers. Also, even if skateboarding were successfully prohibited, we need to know what these people who used to skateboard would do in Central Plaza. Maybe they would do something even more annoying and disruptive than skateboarding.

In conclusion, since we do not know the real reasons why people did not come to Central Plaza as often as before and who were responsible for increasing litter and vandalism, it is not fair to blame the skateboarders. More efforts should be made to investigate the behaviour patterns of the skateboarders to decide whether prohibiting the sports is a feasible and desirable option.




Argument范文与提纲目录(tesolchina)
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-2030117-1-1.html