Argument1第一篇arg

我是洋葱UID: 2392578

题目：
Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region’s highways by ten miles per hour. Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent. But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six month period. Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region’s highways, they should campaign to reduce Foresthill’s speed limit to what is was before the increase.”


By making a questionable comparison of Forestville and Elmsford regarding the causal link of the speed limit and the number of automobile accidents, the arguer concludes that the citizens of Forestville should campaign to make the Foresthill’s speed limit return to the former status. I, however, cannot accept the credibility of this argument for the following three reasons.

To begin with, the arguer fabricates a causal link that the increase of the speed limit will lead to the increase of automobile accidents in Forestville. However, it is entirely likely that the weather of Forestville is harsher than that of six months ago, which also can cause the increase of automobile accidents. Besides, the number of automobile accidents is all the most possibly due to the increase of the number of inexperienced drivers. In addition, the author fails to provide enough evidence to show the change of speed limit is significant, which can directly influence the increase of accidents. The change that the speed limit shifts from 110 miles per hour to 120 miles per hour is so different from that changing from 50 miles per hour to 60 miles per hour, which will make the number of automobile accidents change differently. Thus, this argument is unwarranted.

Next to the point, the author unfairly implies us that the slightly decline of automobile accidents in Elmsford is owing to the remained speed limit. Perhaps more and more people takes the buses to go out instead of driving themselves, with a new policy encouraging public transportation carried out. Or perhaps during the past six months, the situation of the road in Elmsford has been improved a lot and Elmsford becomes an area of relatively easy driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit. Or this may have been a time, such as during harsh weather conditions, when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased. If so, there may be a decreased number of accidents due to fewer automobiles on the road, and not due to the remained speed limits.

Last but not least, the speaker hints us to fallaciously equate Forestville with Elmsford and suggests the citizens of Forestville should campaign to reduce Foresthill’s speed limit to what is before the increase. Although Forestville and Elmsford are neighbors, there are many aspects in which they are different, such as the topography, the geography, the weather, the road situation and the number of the owner of private vehicles and so on. Moreover, the arguer fails to explain what are the speed limit and the accident. If the speed limit changed in Forestville is only about the truck, the impact of the change will have little effect on the other kinds of vehicles. And if the criterion of the accident changes during the six month, the increase of accidents is unreliable.

In sum, this argument is unreasonable for the above three critical respects.

PS：这个题目的序号可能有点问题，我是在一本书上看到了这个题目，但没找到对应的编号，所以就自作主张，给编了个1。如有问题，还恳请大家多担待～

iq28UID: 2152875

题库里面没这个题目的。

Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region’s highways by ten miles per hour. Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent. But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six month period. Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region’s highways, they should campaign to reduce Foresthill’s speed limit to what is was before the increase.”


By making a questionable comparison of Forestville and Elmsford regarding the causal link （汗，自己先不要承认有这个causal link啊，后面还要批的了）of the speed limit and the number of automobile accidents, the arguer concludes that the citizens of Forestville should campaign to make the Foresthill’s speed limit return to the former status. I, however, cannot accept the credibility of this argument for the following three reasons.（开头总体来看腐臭的模板味道不浓，这相当好，否则文章显得太不平衡）

To begin with, the arguer fabricates a causal link that the increase of the speed limit will lead to the increase of automobile accidents in Forestville. （反例举的专业一点啊……大家每次都是说出作者给出了什么什么两者之间关系，然后however ,other possibilities，都是千变一律的模式。同样的题目和反例看看官方范文怎么说的： However, the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit.）However, it is entirely likely that the weather of Forestville is harsher than that of six months ago, which also can cause the increase of automobile accidents. Besides, the number of automobile accidents is all the most possibly （反例本身不错，不过举反例的时候不要用这些武断的字眼。看看官方的范文。）due to the increase of the number of inexperienced drivers. In addition, the author fails to provide enough evidence to show the change of speed limit is significant, which can directly influence the increase of accidents. （想法有道理的点，不过陈述得有点糟糕。‘different’，‘differently’，到底是如何different的结果了？不能太模糊啊，要讲清楚。更合理的摆放位置觉得可以在前面先说提速百分比的问题，然后讲到如果是110到120这种不是很明显的提速，造成的车祸上升的原因可能是别的blablabla。再结合同主题的官方范文提到的地理因素原因，可以试着把提速比例不同和它联系起来，也许能有更为细节话的论述来展示你思维的多样性。）The change that the speed limit shifts from 110 miles per hour to 120 miles per hour is so different from that changing from 50 miles per hour to 60 miles per hour, which will make the number of automobile accidents change differently. Thus, this argument is unwarranted.

Next to the point, the author unfairly implies us that the slightly decline of automobile accidents in Elmsford is owing to the remained speed limit.（这段和上段分开批驳有点尴尬的。升速不一定造成车祸和没升速不一定导致车祸不增加甚至轻微下降，不好好想想针对性的例子的话很容易重起来。如果没有太有针对性的说法两个段落不如合起来，或者具体段落分法不用按照a地，b地那样分。） Perhaps more and more people takes the buses to go out instead of driving themselves, with a new policy encouraging public transportation carried out. Or perhaps during the past six months, the situation of the road in Elmsford has been improved a lot and Elmsford becomes an area of relatively easy driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit. Or this may have been a time, such as during harsh weather conditions, when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased. （官方范文和你举了同样的例子，但是人家就有了升华总结的能够展现提炼能力的总结句：A six-month period is not a particularly long time frame for the citizens to determine that speed limit has influenced the number of automobile accidents in the area. 很多时候我们举的例子不比官方范文差，但是一两个词汇的概括力就是不如人家，导致我们的反例经常看上去罗嗦而又信息量不够，像是泼妇在骂街找茬。比如官方范文中的work or family habits就要比楼主的with a new policy encouraging public transportation carried out. Or perhaps during the past six months可信，而又简洁得多。）If so, there may be a decreased number of accidents due to fewer automobiles on the road, and not due to the remained speed limits.

Last but not least, the speaker hints us to fallaciously equate Forestville with Elmsford and suggests the citizens of Forestville should campaign to reduce Foresthill’s speed limit to what is before the increase. Although Forestville and Elmsford are neighbors, there are many aspects in which they are different, such as the topography, the geography, the weather, the road situation and the number of the owner of private vehicles and so on. （how do these differences affects the false compare? try to explain it, this is too vague）Moreover, the arguer fails to explain what are the speed limit and the accident. If the speed limit changed in Forestville is only about the truck, the impact of the change will have little effect on the other kinds of vehicles. And if the criterion of the accident changes during the six month, the increase of accidents is unreliable. (同样是措施＋事故，同样抠了字眼的含义，楼主可以参考满分范文是怎么做到的。楼主的抠字眼就有点过于类似于找茬了。

Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after rollerskating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within this group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots were not wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, these statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, rollerskaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.

First of all, as mentioned in the argument, there are two distinct kinds of gear -- preventative gear (such as light reflecting material) and protective gear (such as helmets). Preventative gear is intended to warn others, presumably for the most part motorists, of the presence of the roller skater. It works only if the "other" is a responsible and caring individual who will afford the skater the necessary space and attention. Protective gear is intended to reduce the effect of any accident, whether it is caused by an other, the skater or some force of nature. Protective gear does little, if anything, to prevent accidents but is presumed to reduce the injuries that occur in an accident. The statistics on injuries suffered by skaters would be more interesting if the skaters were grouped into those wearing no gear at all, those wearing protective gear only, those wearing preventative gear only and those wearing both. These statistics could provide skaters with a clearer understanding of which kinds of gear are more beneficial. ）

In sum, this argument is unreasonable for the above three critical respects.

总体来看还是相当不错的argument了，例证相当丰富也比较合理，但是切记例证也只是为了展现自己的批判阅读思维能力服务的，argument不是考验举反例的能力。多多看看官方范文评语和要求。加油！

tongwawawUID: 2176887

囧...这时间给人改作文

iq28UID: 2152875

最好不要拖的，呵呵。

tongwawawUID: 2176887

敬业～赞！囧 闪