- 最后登录
- 2013-3-16
- 在线时间
- 482 小时
- 寄托币
- 323
- 声望
- 6
- 注册时间
- 2006-4-8
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 7
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 258
- UID
- 2204517
![Rank: 2](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level2.gif)
- 声望
- 6
- 寄托币
- 323
- 注册时间
- 2006-4-8
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 7
|
题目:ARGUMENT153 - The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper.
"Ever since the 1950's, when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer, over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time television-programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m.-should show less violence. Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."
In this argument, the author claims that the television programmers should reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time in order to lower the rate the teenage crime in Alta because the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in Alta increased parallels the same pace of the violence shown on television since 1950's exemplified by the several national studies and a survey. For a couple of reasons, the argument is not convincing.
In the first place, the author assumes that the violence shown on television caused the teenage crime as well. The line of reasoning is that because television set began to appear in the average home before the increase of the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in Alta the former event led to the latter. However, to reinforce this conclusion the author should have ruled out other causative lines. For example, the criminal teenagers may learn how to commit a crime from other channels such as violence books. Even rarely, several teenagers have violent tendency inherently. But the child with conscience and enough education from parents and schools may be self-discipline even though watch the violent program.
In the second place, in regard to the survey, we do not know the number of people responded to the survey, thus the respondents’ opinions may not represent those of all people. If the samples collected only constitute an infinitesimal proportion of Alta’s population, the result of the survey would not be respresentative.For example, if Alta has 1 million residents and the survey involved only 90 among them, it would be far-fetching to claim that television programmers should reduce the violence programs.
In the third place, merely reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time may not sufficiently lower the rate of teenage crime. The violence programs are no distinction in the influence of audience all the time. For example, the criminal TV series regardless of 8 p.m or 11 p.m may be inductive to teenage crime.
In conclusion, this argument appears to be a weak one after its flaws are exposed. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide evidence the violence shown on television caused the teenage crime when ruling out other factors, and should remark other factor’s influence after that analysis. |
|