Argument17

luckytseUID: 2453178

In the letter the editor suggest that the Walnut Grove's town council should insist the EZ Disposal which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years rather than ABC Waste. To support this conclusion the editor cites the fact that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects only once, and EZ has ordered additional trucks whereas they are the same now. Moreover, a survey last year shows that 80 percent of respondents agreed that they were "satisfied" with EZ's performance before. However, I cannot accept the acceptance of this conclusion.

First of all, the editor certificates his point by  giving the fact that EZ collects trash twice a week while ABC collects once a week. I cannot help asking whether it is necessary to collect the second time while once is enough. Maybe according to experience, only one collection every week is the most economical choice. If the counsil prefers to EZ, then who will be responsible for the unwanted expense?

Secondly, noting that EZ has ordered additional trucks and it seems to be more competent than ABC. But no evidence tells that EZ would distribute the additional trucks to this project. It is entirely possible that EZ has some other projects and the ordered trucks would be assigned to those works. Without ruling out those possibilities the editor cannot convince me that EZ is the better choice compared with ABC.

Thirdly, given the statistical survey that 80 percent of the respondents agreed that they were satisfied with the work EZ has done before. However, the survey did not provide the specific crowd of people of it. There are some alternatives that the survey only surveyed a limited crowd who lives in the centre of of the town where was the only well served place.

In conclusion, this view the editor holds is not well reasoned and it needs more evidence to sustain the fact such as the validity of the second collection and it would bring the residents benefits in deed. Only then can I agree with the editor's suggestion.


1.列出题中观点，提出反对意见
2.论述每周收集两次垃圾可能不合理
3.EZ订购的更多车辆可能不会用在这里
4.调查的不合理性
5.总结

[ 本帖最后由 ntmlgsz 于 2008-2-10 23:21 编辑 ]

conarandoUID: 2387865

有一个很大的bug,题中作者观点所基于的前提不正确:题中作者认为,town council之所以要改用ABC,是因为认定EZ收费较高.这个因果关系不正确,应当驳斥,利用列举他因等方法...