Argument18 限速与道路安全[Chasing for 6]

scentyUID: 2363244

Argument 18
The following appeared in an editorial in a Prunty County newspaper.
"In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County recently lowered its speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 45 on all major county roads. But the 55 mph limit should be restored, because this safety effort has failed. Most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly. If we want to improve the safety of our raods, we should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads. Today, major roads still have a 55 mph speed limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago."

提纲：
1.作者首先说提高高速公路的安全度，但没有阐明这与后面说在城市主干道上采取限速措施的联系。可能是PC政府的一个测试以证明限速对减少事故发生有效果。
2.即使上述成立，作者使用模糊字眼，使我们不能确信限速措施确实失败。
3.即使限速措施失败，应该采用BC的做法，但是考虑到BC与PC之间的区别，还是不能做定论BC的措施适合PC。
4.即使BC的做法确实适合PC的主干道。但是城市道路和高速公路在很多方面是不一样的。所以对提高高速路安全没有帮助。

From editorial, the author concerns a lot on the country's safety of roads and by citing couples of existing situations the speaker assert the previous limit 55 mph should be restored. This argument looks convincing at the very first glance, but under further scrutiny, there are several logical fallacies could be found.


In the first place, as the backgroud the author offered.The attempt of Prunty County(PC) to improve is highway safey rather than the country's road.As a result,to implement the speed limit on the main road is totally irrelevant to decrease the accident rate on highway,let alone the value of the limit is whether effective or not.Or,the government of PC has just performed an experience on the main road to figure out if the speed limit is definitely efficient and useful to improve the highway safety.If so,we can understand why change the speed limit on major country road in order to improve the highway safety as the author said.

Even if the assumption which has analysised above is true.According to the situation that the change of speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph was carried out “recently”, such a vague description of the period make the following assertion the speed limit failed is so unwarranted. How may the speaker define “recently”? If recently means less than a month or so, it is entirely possible that the progress may not conspicuous but it will be proved in future that the speed limit is a successful measure to decrease the number of accidents rate over the country. In the next sentence, the speaker said”most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate has decreased only slightly”. Here, the speaker uses another two ambiguous word ”most” and “slightly” rather than more convincing statistics data such as the percentage of drivers who exceeded the speed limits and the accurate number of decrease of accidents after the implement the restriction. So, unless those evidences talked above it cannot persuade me to confirm that speed limit has failed.

Next,considering the fact that Butler County(BC) has reduced their accident rate of country road by widen the lane widness and smoot the road surface.Unfortunately, the author fails on neglecting the vast differences between PC and BC.At least ,we deserves the concrete populiation and the percentage of them that are used to driving cars as transport and the traffic condition of two towns.It is entirely possible that most resident of BC would rather go out by foot of bicycle because of their mass traffic all the time.And it is also possible that the measures was just effective in the very beginning  few years and then as the amount of cars growing the traffic condition eventually depraving.Without taking consideration of these condition in PC,any firm assertion could not be drawed.

Even if those measures which provend surely to appreprate to apply in PC's main roads. Howsoever,it might be still helpless to the solution of improving highway safety. In fact, the condition of highway is totally different from those on common roads. Firstly, there are no pedestrians and bicycles on highway while roads are ,whatever on main roads or branches. Then, the quality of highway is always better than roads in many aspects such as surfaces and lane widths. Besides, highway is straight and used to link two cities or countries with long distance rather than connected two places in same town with short distance and sometimes full of crooks like roads do. So, the previous successful experience in BC could be operative to meet the PC's demand of amelioration of highway safety.


To sum up, the author’s recommendation of improving the highway safety has not been well supported.Those facts what he cites lends little evidence to strong his assertion.What's more,so many logical flaws in his affirm made us felt confused that what is the exactly target he aimed at,the safety of highway or country roads.

[ 本帖最后由 scenty 于 2008-3-5 20:39 编辑 ]

ljc-dreamUID: 2166457

From editorial, the author concerns a lot on the country's safety of roads and by citing couples of existing situations the speaker assert the previous limit 55 mph[我真的有疑问：aw考试时能这样缩写么？] should be restored. This argument looks convincing at the very first glance, but under further scrutiny, there are several logical fallacies [that] could be found.

In the first place, as the backgroud the author offered[句子不完整，似乎].The attempt of Prunty County(PC) to improve is highway safey rather than the country's road. [the attempt of PC is to improve the highway safety rather than the country’s road] As a result, to implement the speed limit on the main road is totally irrelevant to decrease the accident rate on highway, let alone the value of the limit is whether effective or not. Or,the government of PC has just performed an experience[啥意思？] on the main road to figure out if the speed limit is definitely efficient and useful to improve the highway safety.If so,we can understand why change the speed limit on major country road in order to improve the highway safety as the author said.[赞一个，好细心阿，把highway与mainroad区分出来，但是后面的分析似乎说的并不是很清楚]

Even if the assumption which has analysised above is true.According to the situation that the change of speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph was carried out “recently”, such a vague description of the period make the following assertion the speed limit failed is so unwarranted. How may the speaker define “recently”? If recently means less than a month or so, it is entirely possible that the progress may not conspicuous but it will be proved in future that the speed limit is a successful measure to decrease the number of accidents rate over the country.[这一段很smooth] In the next sentence,[不妥，用in addition吧，毕竟不是让你去改人家的句子] the speaker said”most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate has decreased only slightly”. Here, the speaker uses another two ambiguous word ”most” and “slightly” rather than more convincing statistics data [很漂亮，学习一下]such as the percentage of drivers who exceeded the speed limits and the accurate number of decrease of accidents after the implement the restriction. So, unless [加一个providing吧] those evidences talked above it cannot persuade me to confirm that speed limit has failed.

Next,considering the fact that Butler County(BC) has reduced their accident rate of country road by widen [widening] the lane widness and smoot [smoothing] the road surface.[意思没有表达完整阿，只说了“考虑到……”就没了]Unfortunately, the author fails on neglecting [应该是fails to notice/fails… by neglecting] the vast differences between PC and BC.At least, we deserves[we should be offered the information about] the concrete populiation and the percentage of (them)[them指代不明] that are used to driving cars as transport and the traffic condition of two towns.It is entirely possible that most resident of BC would rather go out by foot of bicycle because of their mass traffic all the time.And it is also possible that the measures was just effective in the very beginning  few years and then as the amount of cars growing the traffic condition eventually depraving.Without taking consideration of these condition in PC,any firm assertion could not be drawed.

Even if those measures which provend surely to appreprate to apply in PC's main roads. Howsoever,it might be still helpless to the solution of improving highway safety. In fact, the condition of highway is totally different from those on common roads. Firstly, there are no pedestrians and bicycles on highway while roads are ,whatever on main roads or branches. Then, the quality of highway is always better than roads in many aspects such as surfaces and lane widths. Besides, highway is straight and used to link two cities or countries with long distance rather than connected two places in same town with short distance and sometimes full of crooks like roads do. So, the previous successful experience in BC could be operative to meet the PC's demand of amelioration of highway safety.


To sum up, the author’s recommendation of improving the highway safety has not been well supported.Those facts what he cites lends little evidence to strong his assertion.What's more,so many logical flaws in his affirm made us felt confused that what is the exactly target he aimed at,the safety of highway or country roads.
sorry，后面的暂时没有时间看了。我有空的时候补上。

[ 本帖最后由 ljc-dream 于 2008-3-6 19:07 编辑 ]