新g Argu 5 求拍~
本帖最后由 ykhjy 于 2012-2-9 14:55 编辑5) The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.
On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals.
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.
In this letter, the writer recommends the town council of Balmer Island to limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies during the summer season to reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedstrians. Based on assumptions that the measure will be effective and the situation is the same as the neighboring island of Seavile. In addition, the writer assumes that limiting rentals is the only measure to reduce the moped accidents. Although it seems reasonable at first glance, many following questions need to be answered.
In the first place, the writer seems to assume that limiting the number of rentals can be effective to reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, thus the recommendation is reasonable. However, will it really effective to attain the goal? It is questionable. There is no evidence to prove that the number of accidents will be necessarily reduced by limiting the number of rentals. It is possible that people will purchase mopeds rather than renting, then even if limiting the number of rentals, it is meaningless for accidents' reduction, thus the recommendation is unreasonable.
In the second place, the writer assumes that the situation in Balmer Island is the same as the neighboring island of Seaville and the measure seems effective in Seaville Island, then it will be also effective in Balmer Island. However, is it the measure of limiting the number of rentals that resulting in 50 percent annual reducation in moped accidents in Seaville? Is the situation in Balmer Island really comparable to the situation in Seaville? I'm afraid. On one hand, there is no direct evidence to prove that the measure contributes to the achievement. On the other hand, only because island of Seaville is the neighbor of Balmer Island, the writer makes such an assumption that the situations are similar. However, there is no information about the situation of Seaville and it is very possible that situations in the two island are very different. For example, the population of Balmer Island is much larger than Seaville Island, thus even if the measure is effective in Seaville, it is unnecessarily appliable in Balmer Island.
Finally, the writer makes an assumption that the large number of rentals is the only factor to the large number of accidents involving in mopeds and pedestrians. However, isn't there any other factors to contribute to the result? It is questionable. There may be many other factors to result in the large number of accidents. It is very possible that people's usual carelessness lead to this situation, therefore, it may be better to educate people to be more careful rather than limiting the number of rentals for reducing the number of accidents. Thus the recommendation is assertive.
In conclusion, whether is the measure to limit the number of rentals effective? Whether the situation in Balmer Island is similar as the situation in Seaville? Whether is it the only measure to reduce the number of accidents? The answers to these questions above lead this recommendation to a unreasonable one.
页:
[1]