argument18 iq28大大给平评分吧

zmqzmqUID：2316241

TOPIC: ARGUMENT18 - 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 roads, 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 Butler County 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."


In this argument, the auger concludes that they should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project. To substantiate this conclusion, the author cites that most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly.The author also cites that major Butler County 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. Nevertheless, close examination on the evidence reveals that how groundless the article is.

The frist flaw in the article is that the author fails to provide sufficient evidence to support that the safety effort is not effective. Since the policy was promoted recently, it is entirely possible that the most drivers are not familiar with the new policy. Perhaps the government has not proclaimed this policy widely. Or perhaps the signal for the limitation is not in the good place for driver to see clearly. In such case, then phenomenon that drivers are exceeding the limit will no longer be surprising. Therefore, after the policy has been taken for a longer time and after the drivers are familiar with the policy, then perhaps few drivers will exceed the speed limit. In addition, the slight decrease of accident is either convincing. Because this policy was only promoted major county roads, thus it might be the case that the traffic accident is mainly in those minor roads where the speed limit is still 55 mph.

The second flaw is that the author fails to convince me that the road improvement project in Butler County is effective. First, since these accidents are "reported", we cannot preclude the possibility that many accidents were not reported by Butler County. Moreover, granted that there were fewer the accidents in the Bulter County, the author unfairly assumes that the phenomenon is attributable to the road improvement. Yet, the author may neglect other possible alternatives to this phenomenon. Such alternatives may include the fact that there were less people in Butler County than there were five years ago. Or that the development of technology in this city has promoted such decline. Perhaps the transportation there are much convenient than it was before. For example, there are more subways that connect the whole city and most people choose to take this facility rather than to drive cars by themselves. If then, the decline of accidents may have nothing to do with the road improvement and is just the result of less driving cars. In short, without ruling out these alternatives, the author cannot justifiably assume that the road improvement is effective there.

Finally, even if both of the foregoing assumptions are substantiated, the author's conclusion that they should undertake the road improvement project and the 55mph limit should be restored is too hasty. On one hand, the author provides no evidence that their lane width needs to be increased and the roads need to be resurfaced. Perhaps the width of the lane in Prunty County is wide enough and the surface of the roads is very smooth. In such cases, the author's recommendation will open to doubt. On the other hand, the author's recommendation that they should restore the 55 mph is groundless. As we all know, the faster the cars are driven, the easier they may get accidents. Therefore, since the 45 mph limit is not effective enough, it at least may be an indication that they should continue lowering its speed limit rather than restore the limitation.

To sum up, this argument relies on several groundless assumptions which render it untrustworthy as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide sufficient evidence to prove that the speed limit policy is not effective. To better evaluate this argument, I should also need to know the other explanations for the decline accidents in Prunty County.

iq28UID：2152875

In this argument, the auger concludes that they should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project. To substantiate this conclusion, the author cites that most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly.The author also cites that major Butler County 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. Nevertheless, close examination on the evidence reveals that how groundless the article is. (不用害怕...开头段落真的不用restate...)
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-134092-1-1.html

The frist flaw in the article is that the author fails to provide sufficient evidence to support that the safety effort is not effective. (本段ts比较失败.没有统领到下面的论证.至少应该提到作者所提到的他的论据.而且下面直接就假设司机不遵守规章是因为政府的原因.看了让人觉得唐突.) Since the policy was promoted recently, it is entirely possible that the most drivers are not familiar with the new policy. Perhaps the government has not proclaimed this policy widely. (此种表达方式不利于突出是时间的问题.更像强调政府的失职.建议改成 Perhaps the new speed limit has not been widely accepted by the drivers yet.) Or perhaps the signal for the limitation is not in the good place for driver to see clearly. (同上) In such case, then phenomenon that drivers are exceeding the limit will no longer be surprising. Therefore, after the policy has been taken for a longer time and after the drivers are familiar with the policy, (上面的例子不是时间的问题,所以这里的结论同样没有太大说服力) then perhaps few drivers will exceed the speed limit. In addition, the slight decrease of accident is either convincing. (这个论点明明可以跟上一个分开构成一个让步的 当然是这个论点在前,前面一个在后) Because this policy was only promoted major county roads, thus it might be the case that the traffic accident is mainly in those minor roads where the speed limit is still 55 mph. (来个总结吧.)(整体上这段还是不错的了)

The second flaw is that the author fails to convince me that the road improvement project in Butler County is effective. First, since these accidents are "reported", we cannot preclude the possibility that many accidents were not reported by Butler County. (不错.前面的那个点不能过分攻击.作为下面转折的引子更好) Moreover, granted that there were fewer the accidents in the Bulter County, the author unfairly assumes that the phenomenon is attributable to the road improvement. (让步提出重点错误) Yet, the author may neglect other possible alternatives to this phenomenon. Such alternatives may include the fact that there were less people in Butler County than there were five years ago. (这个例子还是要再阐述清楚为什么人少事故就少) Or that the development of technology in this city has promoted such decline. Perhaps the transportation there are much convenient than it was before. (总) For example, there are more subways that connect the whole city and most people choose to take this facility rather than to drive cars by themselves. (分.好) If then, the decline of accidents may have nothing to do with the road improvement and is just the result of less driving cars. In short, without ruling out these alternatives, the author cannot justifiably assume that the road improvement is effective there. (这个段落很好)

Finally, even if (good) both of the foregoing assumptions are substantiated, the author's conclusion that they should undertake the road improvement project and the 55mph limit should be restored is too hasty. On one hand, the author provides no evidence that their lane width needs to be increased and the roads need to be resurfaced. Perhaps the width of the lane in Prunty County is wide enough and the surface of the roads is very smooth. (点明了,路况根本不是车祸的原因就可以.wide跟smooth都是不顶用的) In such cases, the author's recommendation will open to doubt. On the other hand, the author's recommendation that they should restore the 55 mph is groundless. As we all know, the faster the cars are driven, the easier they may get accidents. Therefore, since the 45 mph limit is not effective enough, it at least may be an indication that they should continue lowering its speed limit rather than restore the limitation. (没有充分指出45不行就换55的荒谬性...也可能是这个建议实在太荒谬了...) (总体可以了)

To sum up, this argument relies on several groundless assumptions which render it untrustworthy as it stands. To bolster it, the author should provide sufficient evidence to prove that the speed limit policy is not effective. To better evaluate this argument, I should also need to know the other explanations for the decline accidents in Prunty County.

个人观念有望5分
再多注意细节
以后多帮别人改a呵呵
加油