28. The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.
“Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations.” -------------------------------
The arguer asserts the view that in order to attract commuters who drive to the subway to take the shuttle buses there, the transit company should either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations. The conclusion is based on the fact that commuter use of subway train is beyond the projected while the use of shuttle buses is below the company's projections. This argument is unconvincing because it suffers from fallacies.
The threshold problem with this argument is that it fails to explain the causal relationship between the decreased commuter use of the shuttle buses and the increased use of the private cars to drive to the subway station. The author suggests that the latter results in the former. However, some other factors may also contribute to the consequence that the commuter use of the shuttle buses is below the projected amount. Perhaps, the projected volume that the company had set is too high to reach, or perhaps, commuters are travelling to the subway station by bike, by motorcycle or even on foot. Without ruling out all those possible reasons for the consequence, the causal relationship is week and the proposal of cutting the shuttle bus fares or increasing the parking fee at the subway station is also far less than convincing.
In addition, the author commits a fallacy of "either or choice". According to the author, in order to make the shuttle buses more attractive to those who drive to the subway station, the transit company should either cut down on the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations. However, to solve the problem, there are many other possible solutions. For example, the transit company can allow passengers who posses the tickets for subway trains to take the shuttle buses for free, or perhaps the local government can impose a duty on those who drive to the subway station while there are shuttle buses available. The arguer fails to give sufficient reasons to support that both solutions listed above are not practical, and thus the solutions given by the arguer are gratuitous.
To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To solidify the argument, the arguer has to provide more evidences concerning the causal relationship between the use of the shuttle buses and the use of private cars. Besides, the arguer should also give sound advice about the solutions to persuade private car drivers to take the shuttle buses to the subway stations.
我觉得第一可以在原文改写方面改得更多一点，最好是把能改成近义词的表达都替换下会更理想~~ 然后我觉得LZ批判的语气可以更强烈一点， 像第二段“ However, some other factors may also contribute to the consequence that the commuter use of the shuttle buses is below the projected amount. ”这一句，我觉得可以直接说Some other factors can also lead to the consequence that... 在批的时候可以少用点缓和的情态动词（完全个人意见。。。）
结尾段，是不是把逻辑错误再重申一下会更好呢？对了 我觉得首段末句可以说清楚It suffers from two logical falses.（这完全都说的是些细枝末节啊⊙﹏⊙）
LZ加油加油！！！
作文写不好难道是因为思维太差，这打击可太大不好受啊~~只剩10天了 不能一开场AI AA就写不好让自己心灰意冷啊！我一定要加油！！！ We can never exceed ourselves unless we try to do what we were unable of!!（不努力去做自己做不到的，就不能超越自我。都不知道这么说对不对。。o(╯□╰)o。）
The arguer fails to give sufficient reasons to support that both solutions listed above are not practical, thus the solutions given by the arguer are gratuitous.这句话thus 前面要加and，而且这句话读起来很别扭，因该改写一下。 还有一个攻击点，Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections
只剩10天了 不能一开场AI AA就写不好让自己心灰意冷啊！我一定要加油！！！ We can never exceed ourselves unless we try to do what we were unable of!!（不努力去做自己做不到的，就不能超越自我。都不知道这么说对不对。。o(╯□╰)o。）
The arguer fails to give sufficient reasons to support that both solutions listed above are not practical, thus the solutions given by the arguer are gratuitous.这句话thus 前面要加and，而且这句话读起来很别扭，因该改写一下。 还有一个攻击点，Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-5-3 21:02:40
收藏
收藏
楼主
