标题: argument18 by [728西安]小红莓 [打印本页] 作者: 小红莓 时间: 2009-7-23 10:32:07 标题: argument18 by [728西安]小红莓
TOPIC: ARGUMENT18 - The following appeared in an editorial in a Prunty County newspaper.
"In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County recently lowered its speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 45 on all major county roads. But the 55 mph limit should be restored, because this safety effort has failed. Most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly. If we want to improve the safety of our roads, we should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads. Today, major Butler County roads still have a 55 mph speed limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago."
WORDS: 530
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009-7-23 10:23:53
Merely based on the assumption that speed limit from 55 miles per hours to 45 on major county roads in Prunty County has failed, and the fact that Butler County's successful project of increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads five years ago. The author suggests that the Prunty County should also undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago. The argument seems logical while careful analysis reveals several critical flaws in it.
To begin with, it is too hasty to conclude that the speed limit from 55 miles per hours to 45 on major county roads in Prunty County has failed. As the speed is only limited on major county roads rather than all roads, perhaps the rate of accidents on major county roads is largely decreased while the accidents on other roads which did not have speed limit are increased, and as a result the total accident rate has decreased slightly. Without given the data of the number of the major county roads and other roads separately, the conclusion is unconvincing. And perhaps it is just because of the speed is only limited on major county roads, the drivers could not remember the speed on which road is limited and therefore are exceeding the new speed limit. Without given the detailed information of the exceeding, I could not convinced by the author.
Next, there is no detailed information to show that the road improvement project is really successful. If the accidents in Butler County is still far more than Prunty County even when the accidents is fewer than before, the project may have no value for Prunty County to copy. Even if the road improvement project is really successful in the past, there is no information that it will still effectiveness in the future. Before a careful analysis of the value of the road improvement project in Butler County, the author's conclusion is hasty.
What's more, even if the road improvement project in Butler County is really successful not only in the past but also in the future, there is no information that the two counties is same and the same road improvement project would also be effective in Prunty County. Perhaps the road condition of Butler County is really bad and the reason for accidents is the bad road condition, therefore need to be improved. However, the cause of the accident in Prunty County may be just the speed and need to have speed limit rather than road improvement. Without given enough evidence that the two county is totally likely and the road improvement project would also be effective in Prunty County, the author's conclusion is unwarranted.
To sum up, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author should give clear evidence that speed limit from 55 miles per hours to 45 on major county roads in Prunty County has failed, and the road improvement project in Butler County is really successful not only in the past but also in the future. To better assess it, I would also need to know if the two counties is same and should have the same road improvement project.作者: mobius.x64 时间: 2009-7-26 10:10:13