|
写了几篇AA(件论坛),AI一篇, 断断续续看了些范文. 水平好像也提不高了.写了模版,可是到了写文章的时候,好像都没有用上,只是凭自己脑海里的词汇,翻来覆去就这几句.时间太短,我是那种慢慢写,边改边写的人.一快了,就思维停顿了.
AA32 The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper.
recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
In this passage, the author concludes that West Cambria should disbands the volunteer ambulance service and hires a commercial ambulance service to provide better patient care for accident victims. The author bases the conclusion on a review result that West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. The argument is not convincing due to the following flaws in it.
The first flaw with this argument is whether the response times to accidents by the two services are comparable is uncertain. No information is provided about whether two services use same standard to calculate the response time. If the response time by the volunteer ambulance service included the time from the accident location to the hospital while the response time reported by a commercial ambulance squad in East Cambria did not, then the two data is not comparable, so the conclusion of a longer average response time with West Cambria ambulance can not be established.
Secondly, the author argues by analogy that since commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria can response quickly, the commercial ambulance in West Cambria can also fulfill that objective. The author overlooks a big difference between the two ambulance services that they are located in different locations. If West Cambria's geography is more difficult for cars than East Cambria, then the same result can not be expected in West Cambria.
The third flaw is that the author assumes that patient care for accident victims merely mean the short response time. This is not true. Common sense tells us that good patient care also include good first-aid treatment, good medical equipment and good expertise of the physician. Failure to compare all the other factors other than response time makes the conclusion unwarranted.
In conclusion, the argument is fallacious due to the above-mentioned reasons. To strengthen the argument, the arthor needs to provide more information to make the comparison between the response time is reasonable. Moreover ,the arthor should rule out other possibilities mentioned above before reaching the conclusion.
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-7-21 04:28:00
