argument 28 第一篇argu习作，求互改猛拍
第一篇习作，请牛人指点，不胜感激！28. The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.
“Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.”
The argument is well-presented, but ill-reasoned. The arguer believes that by reducing the shuttle bus fares or increasing the price of parking at the subway stations, there will be more commuters to ride the shuttle buses rather than drive to the subway. However, the argument makes unfounded assumptions and fails to consider possible factors that may influence that effects of measures mentioned.
First of all, the arguer unwarrantedly assumes that the less commuters using the shuttle buses to the subway station is because more commuters drive to the station. There might be other possible explanations. For example, people who live near the subway station are more likely to walk there. It is possible that there are a lot of people living nearby. Besides, people can ride a bicycle to the subway station. This transportation might attract more young people who want to take exercises in their way to work. Thus, it is unfair to attribute the unexpected volume to the driving behavior.
Secondly, reducing the shuttle bus fares and increasing the price of parking may be ineffective to this problem considering other factors. It is possible that there are few shuttle bus stops. In that case, people might find inconvenient to take buses, therefore choosing other transports. In addition, if shuttle buses take longer time than cars to the destination, people who value time much will give up riding shuttle buses. Likewise, increasing the price of parking may be useless if commuters can find cheaper parking lots nearby. Or perhaps, people will not take the little-increased price into account if they care more about benefits brought by driving cars. Therefore, there are alternative factors should be considered before making decisions.
Last but not least, the transit company might make impropriate projections for the volume of commuter use of subway train as well as their use of the shuttle buses. Is that possible that the company overestimate the volume of the use of buses to the station, while at the same underestimate the total use of the new subway? If so, the worries behind the original problems are gone.
Overall, this argument seems logical because it is from the perspective of the transit company. Nonetheless, the company should consider all the possible factors before making measures to the problem. Also, the company should reevaluate its standards for the volume. 欢迎指点，互改~ 到底还是写Argument顺手很多~
这个题目可以从三个方面考虑的
1."If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there",也就是lz的第一个反驳点,人们可以采用走路的方式
2."either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations"这里可以take both ways,也就是可以在减少公交车费的同时增加停车费
3.不一定非要采取减少公交车费的方法或者增加停车费的方法,他可以增加公交车的数量班次,线路,提高公交车的服务,以及减少地铁站附近的停车位这些方法
lz前两个理由挺不错的~但是第三个,我没怎么看懂,可能今天玩得有点high,脑残了一会,明天再来看下;d: 第三个理由是说transit company可能本身标准制定得就有问题，才会造成人为ride shuttle buses的人不多 我觉得argument的文章最好是就它本身所提出的内容进行反驳
至于它没有提到的，最好不要作为攻击的理由，这样的话argument都可以写论文了:loveliness: 原帖由 Tyliayss 于 2008-5-14 00:24 发表
我觉得argument的文章最好是就它本身所提出的内容进行反驳
至于它没有提到的，最好不要作为攻击的理由，这样的话argument都可以写论文了:loveliness:
版主大人，我没有跳出文章引用，是出自这里：
Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume.:loveliness: up up up
页:
[1]