第一次把自己练习的文章发上来，写得很烂，我知道 让大家见笑了，但还望看过的同志，多多打击，多多指正。小妹快考试了，现在很急呢。麻烦咯。 “Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.” The conclusion endorsed in this argument is that the transit company must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the bus stations. To support this argument, the author points out that the commuter uses of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway station is below the projected volume, while commuter use of the subway train is exceeding the transit company’s expectations. At first glance, the author's argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that the conclusion is based on some questionable assumption and the reasoning is bias owing to the insufficient and partiality in the nature of evidence provided to justify the conclusion. A careful examination would review how untenable.
At the first place, the author assume that the commuter drive to the subway station rather than use the shuttle bus because the fares of the bus are high and the parking fares are low. However, the author focuses only on the fares. A more detail analysis would reveal that other factors would turn out the same results. For example, perhaps the internal condition of the buses are so dirty that the commuter do not want to take it; perhaps the speed of the buses are so slowly t; perhaps the buses have inconvenient routings that are not applicant to the commuter . Lacing a more comprehensive analysis of the cause it is presumptuous for the author to claim the conclusion.
In the second place, the author falsely assumes that there is only one way that the company either reduces the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the bus stations to solving this problem. Common sense, however, tells me that there are such ways as improve the condition, raise the speed,
or change the inconvenient shuttle routing, to list just a few. The author must explain why none of these option are available or why the would fail. Otherwise, I cannot accept that the proposed way is necessary.
In sum, as it stands, the argument is not very valid and persuasive. Accordingly, it is imprudent for the author to claim that the transit company must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the bus stations. To make the this argument logically acceptable and to solidify the conclusion, the author should provide more concrete evidence to demonstrate that the reduce of the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the bus stations could made people to ride the bus to the subway rather than drive there. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal. | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2006-11-9 00:21:00
楼主
