- UID
- 683483
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-10-18
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
Merely based on some assumptions and dubious evidences, the author draws a conclusion that the accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians in Balmer Island by limiting the number of moped rental. The argument refers that such a method can render Balmer achieve an annual attainment on accidental reduction liken Seaville. In my point of view, however, the argument suffers from three logical flaws.
First, the argument implies that A similar moped rental limits measure taken in Seaville’s town last year can be also effective to the Balmer. The author is likely to assume that all the conditions are the same between the Balmer and Seaville. However, are there any other influential factors on the reduction of accidents in Seaville? Apparently, the author has not answered such a question. Supposing that the residents in Seaville much observed transportation rules or they 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.
Second, the argument assumes that limiting the number of mopeds rental from Balmer Island local companies from 50 per day to 25 per day, can be benefit on the reduction of the accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians. Is there a cause-and-effect linkage as the author’s assumption? Obviously, the author considers and rules out other possibilities. For example, perhaps, primarily, people rarely rent the moped from a company, because they have their own mopeds. Therefore, the arguer does not effectively show the connection that limiting the moped rental can efficaciously reduce the accidents, while other causes to the accident possibly exist.
Finally, the author omits two logical flaws of hasty generalization and causal assumption. Yet, is limiting the number of moped rental during the summer season in Balmer the same as annual limiting in Seaville’s town? It is possible that the most of the accidents happen in spring season because of the raining weather. Another fallacy is that argument commits that using moped should take full responsible on the accidents involving both mopeds and pedestrians. Does it make sense? As the above paragraph mentions, possibly, while most accidents is due to the pedestrians who seldom obey the traffic rules and etc Plainly, the argument does not reveal the answer to this question.
To sum up, by merely concluding that limiting the moped rented by the island’s moped companies as Seaville is in effect, this arguer fails to substantiate its claim to reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more information with regard to the given factors discussed above, it would have more thorough and logical acceptable. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-9-24 21:22:48
收藏
收藏
楼主
