|
AA11
A11. The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a newspaper: “Last year when laceName w:st="on">WashingtonlaceName> laceType w:st="on">CountylaceType> received a special appropriation for improving highway safety, it spent all those funds to straighten sections of certain county roads. Unfortunately, the number of traffic accidents in the county was actually higher than in the previous year. Although laceName w:st="on">AdamslaceName> laceType w:st="on">CountylaceType> received a smaller appropriation for improving highway safety, it hired more police officers and enforced traffic laws more strictly. Last year laceName w:st="on">AdamslaceName> County reported 15% fewer traffic accidents than during the previous year. Since money for improving highway safety throughout the state is limited, we can achieve greater success with less expenditure by using all such funds for stricter enforcement of speed limits.”
According to the argument, the author advocates that the state mentioned should use all its funds to reinforce speed limits rather than improve road condition. To buttress his claim, the author cites that in Adams County, the accident rate declines significantly after the county tightens its speed control. Moreover, the author claims that Washington County, which receives a special appropriation to ameliorate highway safety, reports a higher accidents rate. On meticulous reflection, however, the author's deduction is heavily biased for some intolerable fallacies.
To begin with, the author illogically assumes that strengthening certain county road is useless in preventing car accidents because after the improvement the number of accidents rises. No information, however, is offered to substantiate this crucial assumption. It is possible that the accidents in the certain improved road decrease significantly. Moreover, the author fails to rule out other potential factors that may lead to the phenomenon. For instance, the accidents this year outnumber those of previous year because this year Washington County undergoes serious weather, which hampered the drivers’ visual condition. Without eliminating these possibilities, the author reaches an unwarranted inference.
Additionally, the author fallaciously postulates that the stricter speed limit is the only reason for accident decline because the enforcement happens occasionally before the decrease. The mere statistical correlation does not necessarily indicate a causal relationship between the two events. Many other factors may help to explain the phenomenon. For example, people may become more prudent when drive because Adamn County meanwhile spends large proportion of it budget to propagandize the importance of traffic safety. Or perhaps a special program intended to enhance people's recognition in traffic safety does work. Lacking information about other tactics of A county, we can hardly conclude whether enforcement of speed limits is as effective as mentioned.
Last but not lease, the author commits the fallacy of "all things equal". Granted that the stricter enforcement lead to accidents decline in Adamn County, it is absurd to presume that the strategy will bring same triumph in other counties, because these counties are not analogous at all. Perhaps it is easy for Adamn County to hire more police at a low cost because the unemployment rate there is high, but the labor cost will be tremendous in other counties. Or perhaps people in Adamn County are more complied with traffic law. These differences will heavily undermine the success rate of enforcement in other counties.
To sum up, it is unwise for a prudent decision-maker to accept the recommendation soly on the basis of the analysis presented, because the information quoted in the argument is too vague to guarantee the author's claim. To solidify the proposal, the author should demonstrate that enforcement of speed limits is an indispensable solution. Moreover, I would be still skeptical about the validity of the conclusion unless the author finally excludes all the potentialities analyzed above.
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-6-6 20:54:00
楼主
发表于 2005-6-11 21:15:00
