Argument 27 范文

tesolchina_RAUID：3675555

Argument 27/29

Arg 27 reduce traffic with bicycle lane-o

27) The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. But last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. A better alternative is to add a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, and so would reduce rush-hour traffic rather than fostering an increase.

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.

29) The following appeared in an editorial in a local newspaper.

Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. Opponents note that last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. Their suggested alternative proposal is adding a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, it is argued, thereby reducing rush-hour traffic.

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: Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time.

C1: The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic.

G2: But last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it.

C2: A better alternative is to add a bicycle lane to Blue Highway.

G3: Many area residents are keen bicyclists.

G4: A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, and so would reduce rush-hour traffic rather than fostering an increase.


A1(G2): The addition of a lane in Green Highway did not help alleviate the problem.

A2(G2): The same failure would happen to Blue Highway.

A3(G3, C2): Keen bicyclists would be keen on commuting by bicycles. (include feasibility test)


the reason why the traffic jam worsened in Green Highway and whether history would repeat itself in Blue Highway
- maybe drivers switched to Green from other highways after the widening
- more people use Green due to the booming economy of a town connected by Green
- whether the same things would happen to Blue Highway

whether it is feasible to commute by bikes
- it may not be healthy to bike due to the heavy air/ noise pollution caused by the cars
- it may be too exhausting to bike over long distance

whether the residents are willing to commute by bikes
- not all residents own bikes (they may be unwilling to buy new bikes)
- theyd like to bike for exercises (not for commuting)
- they already own cars/ they do not want to waste the cars
- they need the car at work





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