[a习作temp] argument20 29min,较高频，第六篇了 [复制链接]

Esther.Li
UID：191003

元老版主

Rank: 11

声望: 91
寄托币: 27803
注册时间: 2005-1-2
精华: 12
帖子: 238

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-8-14 15:28:03 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

————题目————
20.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island
Gazette.

"The population of Balmer Island increases to 100,000 duing 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 each of the island's six moped and bicycle rental
companies from 50 per day to 30 per day during the summer season. By
limiting the number of rentals, the town council is sure to attain the 50
percent reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year in the
neighboring island of Torseau, when Torseau's town council enforced
similar limits on moped rentals."

————正文————
In this argument, the arguer recommends that to reduce the number of accidents in mopeds and pedestrians' accidents in Balmer Island, the council must limit the number of rented mopeds by half and gives example of a neighboring town and some statistics besides. The evidence appears sufficient and persuasive at the first glance, however, when we examine it earnestly, the arguer commits severely fallacies as follows.

To begin with, we are not given any information about the pedestrians. Saying to reduce the number of accidents on mopeds and pedestrians, the arguer fails to make a survey of the pedestrians, so we can assume that doing as the arguer recommends might bring the result that more pedestrians, for fewer mopeds might lead to more pedestrians directly. Unless the arguer can give out evidence to guarantee the pedestrians can be still safe, the argument is already meaningless.

Secondly, the arguer oversimplifies the resolving of the problem by simply reduce the bicycle number. Common sense tells us that accidents are caused by numerous reasons, such as paying little attention to the traffic rules, driving or riding after a drink, the poor condition of the road, or the foggy weather and the like. If these aspects cannot be properly settled and ruled out, the arguer cannot accomplish his goal to reduce the accidents risk.

Besides, the statistics supplied does not help to support much. The arguer makes a mistake of false analogy, for he does not take the difference of the two towns into account. The two towns might be different in traffic quantities, populations, vehicles and so on, and thus a simple number got last year cannot reason so much as the arguer intends to. To buttress his or her point of view, the arguer must provide sufficient direct evidence, otherwise the argument is questionable.

In summary, the arguer fails to do research on complete conditions, oversimplifies the complexity of the problem and commits a fault of false analogy. To demonstrate his or her argument, sufficient evidence and concrete statistics must be list and clearly analyzed, or the suggestion will remain meaningless and misleading.

（352 words, 29min）

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-14 at 18:05 ]