标题: Argument5 求大家拍一拍~~~并讨论提纲 [打印本页] 作者: realjimyli 时间: 2013-3-3 21:14 标题: Argument5 求大家拍一拍~~~并讨论提纲 The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette. On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation. 提纲： 1.事故增长与人口增长无关，可能是由于其他原因。 2.作者提供的数据推理理由不充分。也许，减少了每日租车量上限，车的每日租借量并不会减少，当然也不一定能减少事故数量。 3.与附近岛屿的类比不一定成立。S岛的成功也可能源于其他原因。
Response：
496 words
In the letter, the author argues that in order to reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians on Balmer Island, the town should limit the number of mopeds rented per day. To bolster this argument, the author provides population increase and an example from a neighboring island as evidence and promise annual reduction in moped accidents after the application of the restriction. The article, although plausible at the first glance, reflects multiple logical flaws in reasoning. More evidence should be provided to account for the following questions. The first question, which the author should answer in the first place, is whether the population increase during the summer months can definitely lead to the increase of accidents between mopeds and pedestrians. The common sense informs us there may be myriad answers to this question. In other words, these accidents may have several other essential causes. For instance, the poor quality of the mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies, the unreasonable laws carried out on traffic, and the uneven roads on Bamer Island all might result in the large amount of accidents. Any of these scenarios, if true, will undermine the validity of the author's recommendation. In addition, there is no sufficient evidence to prove the predictable 50% annual reduction in moped accidents would be caused by the number limit of mopeds by the islands' moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during summer season. Is there a cause-and-effect linkage as the author's assumption? Obviously, the author rules out other possibilities. Perhaps, the original average of mopeds rented by a company per day is less than 25. Therefore, after this restriction on the number of rented mopeds, moped rental companies can still meet the average need of mopeds in Balmer and the average number of mopeds on the road per day would not like to reduce. In that case, the number of moped accidents would remain the same under same conditions and consequently, the restriction proposed by the author will make no sense. Another problem needed to answer is whether the validity of the limits on the neighboring island of Seaville means the same on Balmer Island. The author is likely to assume that all the conditions are the same between Balmer and Seaville. However, are there any other influential factors on the reduction of moped accidents? Apparently, the author has not answered the question. Supposing that the residents in Seaville much observed traffic rules and seldom used mopeds when crowded last year, the reduction of accident also worked instead without limiting the moped rental. Thus, many other decisive factors on the reduction can be assumed. If the recommendation shows more details, the argument will sound and be strengthened. A safe traffic environment needs sound laws, high-quality roads and vehicles, residents' awareness and so forth not only limits on the number of vehicles. Failing to consider these factors and answer the questions above, the author doesn't support the recommendation well.