[a习作temp] +U 小组iris作业Argument 227, 8.18 [复制链接]

icefirekk
UID：2293126

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 160
注册时间: 2007-1-17
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-8-18 16:58:04 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

ARGUMENT227 - The following appeared as aneditorial in a local newspaper.

"In order to attract visitors to Central Plazadowntown and to return the plaza to its former glory, the city should prohibitskateboarding there and instead allow skateboarders to use an area in Monroe Park.At Central Plaza, skateboard users are about theonly people one sees now, and litter and defaced property have made the plazaunattractive. In a recent survey of downtown merchants, the majority supporteda prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza. Clearly, banning skateboarding in Central Plaza will make the area a place wherepeople can congregate for fun or for relaxation."

The intend of the author is inspiring andthe argument seems cogent at first glance. However, the author overemphasizesthe affect of the skateboard users and the survey, and overlooks severalimportant elements that actually play vital roles in the flourishing of the Central Plaza.

To begin with, the validity of the surveyis open to question. Since the respondents of the survey are downtownmerchants, who care the profit of their business most regardless of theactivities in the Central Plaza. If these merchantswere asked to answer the options after they were informed that the litter anddefaced property are caused by the skateboard users, they would certainly formthe unapproved opinion. It is highly possible that these merchants do not havebusiness near the Central Plaza and the result ofthe survey is guided by the surveyor. Also, merchants may ascribe their profitfall to the activities of the skateboard users, while in fact it is not thecase.

What about the litter and defaced propertyin the Central Plaza? Has the author any evidence toprove that that are result of the activities of skateboarding? It is possiblethat the litter and defaced property have long existed there because of thelack of budget on repairing and cleaning. Furthermore, the author suggest thatallow skateboarders to use an area in MonroePark instead of Central Plazais unwarranted. What if that the skateboarders like to skate in Central Park because of the spacious plaza? What if the Monroe Parkis an area full of artificial waterfalls and facilities? Under thesecircumstance, allow them to skate in Monroe Park will cause moredamage eventually.

Finally, prohibition of the skateboardingin Central Park may result in that no one canbe seen any more in it. Why? The author fails to consider other possibilitiesthat really behind the unattractiveness. Does the transportation not convenientfor the people who intend to exercise in Central Plaza?Or does the necessary facilities inadequate for holding a party or picnic? Eachscenario can cause the Central Plaza to be unattractiveregardless of the activities of skateboarding, moreover activities ofskateboarding can attract more exerciser in the Plaza and play a role inregaining its former glory.

Take into consideration above mentionedpossibilities, it is presumptuous for us to prohibit the activities ofskateboarding, and it is ridiculous for us to wait for the Central Plazato be its former glory just do nothing more to improve the environmentalcondition related to Central Plaza such astransportation, facilities, and service spots.