ARGUMENT138 求拍呀求拍 下周就考试了~~各位帮帮忙

charleqinUID: 2854380

TOPIC: ARGUMENT138 - The following report appeared in a memo from the vice president of the Southside Transportation Authority.

"We should abandon our current five-year plan to purchase additional buses to serve the campus of Southside University, because students there are unlikely to use them. Consider the results of the recent campaign sponsored by the Environmental Club at Southside University: in a program on the campus radio station, the club asked students to call in and pledge that they would commute to school by bus instead of by automobile at least one day per week. Only ten percent of the students called in and pledged. In view of the campaign's lack of success, we can assume that the bus service we currently offer will continue to be sufficient to serve the university."
WORDS: 400
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/8/8 17:27:21

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the buses currently offered for Southside University (SU) is sufficient served, because the arguer thought the students in SU are unlikely to use them. It seems well present at the first glance, however, it is not well reasoned, and the argument has some flaws.

To begin with, there is no such sufficient evidence to prove that students in SU are really do not want to go to school by bus. Lacking more specific information about the real and entire situations of whether students in SU are have no willing to take a bus, it is impossible to access the reliability of the survey's results or to make an informed recommendation. However, in my point of view, maybe the data of the survey took by the campus radio station is too little to prove so. The few responds of the recommendation that advising the students commute to school by bus instead of by automobile at least one day per week, not mean the students who haven’t respond to the radio station are against to follow the recommendation. Maybe this kind of students would like to go to school by bus rather than by their own automobiles without saying anything.

Furthermore, the argument has not mentioned that the clear information about the situations of how many students have automobiles and this is important to make a conclusion of whether the student has to by bus. If it is a few number of students in SU have automobiles, thus, even if these students want to go to school by the automobiles, there is no chance to let them do like that, and they have to go to school by bus. So, the Southside Transportation Authority should have to provide more buses for SU in order to satisfy the needs of SU. Whereas, it would have been make inconvenient for the students to go to school.

To sum up, the arguer fails to substantiate its claim that whether the students in SU were really do not want to go to school by bus, because the evidences cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more clear information to prove so. Therefore, if the argument had included the given factors above, it would have been more thorough and logically acceptable.