[argue]第一次限时习作，欢迎大家拍砖指导

九日UID: 2282780

恩。 完全没有检查和改过的原稿。 估计考试时候也不会有时间检查吧。
大家帮我看看我现在这水平是不是只能2分啊～！！！
- Argument: The following appeared in a newspaper published in the state of Celera.
"Speed limits on our state's highways should be eliminated in order to increase our state's prosperity. Because greater speed means more efficient travel, commercial deliveries will be faster, increasing business profits. Elimination of speed limits will also make driving more attractive to motorists, so that more people will use the highways, providing more highway toll revenues for the state. At the same time, safety on our highways will not be affected: daytime speed limits were eliminated last year in the western states of our country, and no significant increase in the number of accidents in these states has been reported."
time:30
word: 479

In this argument, the arguer recommends that our state's highways speed limits should be eliminated in order to increase our state's prosperity. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer points out that greater speed means more efficient travel. In addition, the arguer reasons that in the western states of out country where day time speed limits were eliminated last year, there is no significant increase in the number of accidents has been reported. On the surface the argument appears to be somewhat logical, however in actuality, a careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.


First of all, the arguer draw to the conclusion relies on the assumption that greater speed means more efficient travel, and increasing business profits. In the abstract, it seems that increase the speed limits may bring more traffic during the same period on the same way. But there no evidence in the argument shows that the business in our state developed in a low speed because of the speed limit of the traffic. Several other reasons may take charge of the business such as bad globe economical situation, etc. Without points out the contact between speed limits and business profits it is lacks credibility to come to the conclusion.


Secondly, the arguer asserts that elimination of speed limits will provide more highway toll revenues for the state. We can not know from the argument that eliminat the speed of highway will encourage more people to choose highway as their travel methord. Increase the limits speed of the high may cause some people feel afraid to drive on the highway because worry about the safty, which will cause the number of peole who wants to drive change their minds to choose other travel methords, such as by air or train. It may even decreaste the highway toll revenues for the state instead of increased it.

Last but not least, the arguer asserts that safety on our highways will not be affected base on the evidence that in the western states of our country, where daytime speed limits were eliminated last year, no significant increase in the number of accidents in these states has been report. First, there is no evidence shows in the argument that our state has the same geography situation as these states in the west. Probably the ground in west state is very flat and our state is a mountain area. Secondly, the highway may be new built in west state, so it is in great situation for high speed traffic. But out highway was built in tens of years ago, and it is unsafe for high speed traffic.

To sum up, the conclusion reached in the argument lacks credibility since the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims. If the argument includes the given factors the discussed above, it would have been more thorough and adequate.

夏の末UID: 2603892

没仔细看，分析不够透彻，很多他因没有展开来写，可能LZ是受了模板的影响吧，语言上也比较死板，不过也不至于2分哪！！！不如放开来点写，风格自由一点，也许会好些，加油，要对自己有信心！！