ARGUMENT67 [jet小组] 第八次作业

ljc-dreamUID: 2166457

DATE: 2008-2-17 14:49:26

ARGUMENT67 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a newspaper serving the villages of Castorville and Polluxton.

"Both the villages of Castorville and Polluxton have experienced sharp declines in the numbers of residents who pay property taxes. To save money and improve service, the two villages recently merged their once separate garbage collection departments into a single department located in Castorville, and the new department has reported few complaints about its service. Last year the library in Polluxton had 20 percent fewer users than during the previous year. It follows that we should now further economize and improve service, as we did with garbage collection, by closing the library in Polluxton and using the library in Castorville to serve both villages."      

In this argument, the author recommends that closing the library in Polluxton and using the library in Castorville to serve both villages would be a good choice to save money and improve service. To justify this recommendation, the author cites the fact that the mergence of the two villages’ once separate garbage collection departments into a single one has brought fewer complaints. However, a close scrutiny of the argument reveals it suffers from several logical fallacies, as discussed below.

First of all, to support the success of the mergence of the two garbage collection departments, the author merely mentions that there were few complaints about its service. However, few complaints do not necessarily indicate a high level service. It is entirely possible that the new department prevented the complaints of residents from being reported in time, or that certain kinds of inefficient service may not be detectable in the short term. Besides, there isn’t any more direct evidence presented that setting a single garbage collection department had anything whatsoever to do with the economization and service improvement. From the letter we know nothing about the new department's function, including the attitude towards clients, the ability to handle intricate problems, and efficiency of quotidian process; furthermore, the author fails to offer us economical statistics to indicate the decrease of financing of the new department compared with that of the original two separate departments.

In addition, even if it is true that the mergence of two garbage collection departments has led to the decrease of finance and the improvement of service, but that does not indicate the chance for success when it is applied to the unite of two libraries. It is entirely possible that the two libraries are so distinct from each other in collections and type of function that it is infeasible to combine them. For example, if the library in Castorville adopted a different way of cataloging, classifying and shelving from that of Polluxton, then the hasty combination of them will bring about a mess which oppositely lead to a waste of money and low efficiency. What’s more, even if the two libraries are compatible with their functions, a survey should be made to provide more information about the spectrum of collections, the efficiency of network, and the rate of circulation etc, and then people can choose which library is better to serve both villages.

Finally, the letter says nothing about the tendency of choice by residents of the two villages. What if those who live in Polluxton are reluctant to go a long way to another village to borrow books and consult information? Also, what if those who live in Castorville oppose the decrease of average space and service? If the rash mergence of the two libraries arouses dissatisfaction from the residents, we can never expect a type of advisable service even though the costs of functions are reduced.

In sum, the evidence offered by the author is far from convincing. The author fails to establish any causal relationship between the mergence of the two garbage collection departments with the economization and better services. Thus, a cursory decision to use the single library in Castorville to serve both villages would contribute less to the decrease of costs and the improvement of services. More data for the situation of the two libraries, a survey of the inclination of the residents should be taken into account to assure a substantial and operative recommendation.