argument151 AWER小组，求拍

zhuzz05UID: 2355356

TOPIC: ARGUMENT151 - The following is a letter to the editor of the Atticus City newspaper.

"Former Mayor Durant owes an apology to the city of Atticus. Both the damage to the River Bridge, which connects Atticus to Hartley, and the traffic problems we have long experienced on the bridge were actually caused 20 years ago by Durant. After all, he is the one who approved the construction of the bridge. If he had approved a wider and better-designed bridge, on which approximately the same amount of public money would have been spent, none of the damage or problems would have occurred. Instead, the River Bridge has deteriorated far more rapidly over the past 20 years than has the much longer Derby Bridge up the river. Even though the winters have been severe in the past several years, this is no excuse for the negligence and wastefulness of Durant."
WORDS: 305          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2008-3-14 20:05:21

In this argument, the speaker claims that former Mayor Durant(D) should apology to the city of Atticus. Because D approved the construction of the River Bridge(RB). And there are many traffic problems on the bridge during the past 20 years. To bolster the argument, the speaker also provide the evidence that another longer bridge called Derby Bridge(DB) has deteriorated less rapidly over the past 20 years than RB. However, I find the argument unpersuasive in many aspects.

To begin with, the speaker fails to provide the evidence that the cause of traffic problems is bad-design of the beidge. Perhaps that the RB was the best-design bridge 20 years ago. And it is possiable that many other factors cause the traffic problems, like weather, management and so on. The speaker fails to rule out other reasons, which greatly weakens the argument.

Furthermore, the fact that DB has deteriorated less rapidly over the past 20 years than RB lends no support to the argument. Even if that both the two bridges were built 20 years ago. Perhaps that RB is used more times than DB. And also the different location may also have different influence to the bridge. The speaker fails to take into account many other possible factors. The argument is weakened again.

There is no evidence that better-design would not have these problems like traffic problems and damage. It is no denying that design is important, but the use and management are also very important to a bridge when it is finished. Only with good-design, but not to use and manage well, the bridge also would have many traffic problems and damages.

To sum up, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To support the argument, the speaker should provide more sufficient evidence that the mayor D really is the reason of the RB's problems.