Argument 132 求拍！！！ 谢谢大家了~
The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville.
"All students should be required to take the driver's education course at Centerville High School
. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centerville have involved teenage drivers. Since a number of parents in Centerville have complained that they are too busy to teach their teenagers to drive, some other instruction is necessary to ensure that these teenagers are safe drivers. Although there are two driving schools in Centerville, parents on a tight budget cannot afford to pay for driving instruction. Therefore an effective and mandatory program sponsored by the high school is the only solution to this serious problem."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
1.因果关系错，事故不一定因为C镇年轻人驾驶水平差
2.信息不完整，不能接受驾驶培训的人数
3.其他途径
The suggestion that an effective and mandatory program should be sponsored by the high school for requiring all students to take the driver’s education course seems at first glance to be helpful. After all, teenage drivers have been involved in several accidents in and around Centerville, especially when considering that that is result from the absence of driving education. However, the argument is flawed by a series of unwarranted assumptions, which may result in a ineffective measurement for solving this problem.
Firstly, the author assumes that the accidents are caused by the teenagers’ poor driving technique. But that may not be the case. First of all, the argument does not provide any evidence that the teenagers involved in the accidents are live in Centerville. It is likely that they are travelers who know less about the traffic regulations in Centerville
. Even if they are residents of Centerville, we are not sure that the accidents were attributed to the driver. It may be caused by some pedestrians running across the street immediately. Thus, not until finding out the real causes of the accidents can we take an appropriate measurement.
Given that teenagers’ poor technique is the cause of the accidents, the argument is still weakened by incomplete information. Without the total number of teenagers who are unavailable for the driving education because of their busy parents or poor family, we are not sure about the necessity of the driving instruction for all students. If there are only 10 teenagers suffer from that trouble, the driving instruction is obviously a bad idea because that will be a waste of time for most of teenagers.
Finally, the driving instruction sponsored by the high school may be neither the only nor the best solution to the serious problem. If the accidents are caused by travelers instead the native teenage drivers, it may be more useful to strengthen the safety education and the propaganda of traffic regulations. If there are only 10 teenagers who are unavailable for driving education, it may be more efficient to fund for them to go to the driving schools. Even if most of the native teenage drivers are not safe drivers, funding for the driving schools to sponsor a mandatory program with less tuition fees may be a more effective measurement.
In sum, we need to have additional evidence in order to find out the real causes of the accidents. We also need more information about the total number of the teenage drivers with poor driving technique to make sure how many teenagers need a mandatory driving instruction. Only after we examine all the unstated assumptions can we take an effective measurement to solve the serious problem.
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-5-17 16:11:49
收藏
收藏
