5.27 argument 123 [helmet]

749896499

123.The following appeared in a health newsletter.

"A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of accidents caused by bicycling has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, there is clearly a call for the government to strive to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents by launching an education program that concentrates on the factors other than helmet use that are necessary for bicycle safety."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.


Outline:
1.    200 percent
2.    Feel safer?
3.    Efficient ?


In this newspaper, the author recommends that government launch an education program that concentrates on the factors other than helmet use to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents. To support this recommendation, the author cites data that shows the proportion of wearing helmets from 35 percent increasing to 80 percent, while the number of bicycle accidents increasing 200 percent. Also the author points out that it is that bicyclist feel safer when they are wearing helmet and they take more risks as a result, that cause the increase. While the advice is plausible at first glance, close scrutiny of this argument reveals that the argument is unconvincing in many regards.

To begin with, the author assumes that the number of accidents by bicycling increasing 200 percent in the past ten years is a great increase. However, 200 percent increase is great indeed, basing on the details the author offers? The author does not offer any evidence shows the precise number or the rate of increase of bicycle. Perhaps the bicycle number has increased 800 percent or even greater, then the 200 percent increase of accidents caused by bicycling cannot be used to back the author’s argument. Perhaps ten years ago there are little accidents caused by accident, though a 200 percent increase seems to be a large increase, the precise number of accident caused by bicycling may be still in a low level. We just do not know, unless the author offers more details of the data. Without accounting for and ruling out these or other possibilities, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.

Additionally, even if 200 percent increase of accident caused by bicycling are great enough, when it comes to bicyclist feeling safer because wearing a helmet, another question is still on the way: are there no other direct reasons leads to the increase accident caused by bicycling. While wearing a helmet may make people have such illusion that they are safe enough, the author ignores other more possible reasons. It is likely that the quality of helmets today are much worse than those ten years ago, thus leading to a host of accidents. It is also likely that the design of bicycle’s speed is much higher than that ten years ago, thus naturally increase the risks of accidents. The author’s reasoning is flawed unless the author can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.

Furthermore, even if his/her deduction and inference made in the argument above is true, the author still fails to perform a feasibility analysis that government should launching an education program for bicycle safety to reduce accidents caused by bicycle. We may wonder if this kind of education program is efficient. It is likely that people do not pay attention to such program, thus government may waste much money on this useless policy. Perhaps, government cannot stick with this kind of program, and gives it up after several months. Still perhaps, in future bicycling is not so popular as today, and the cars are the main reason for accidents. As a matter of fact, the author offers little information about the efficiency of this kind of education program. Unless the author can prove the efficiency of this policy more or less, can it be carried out.

To reduce accidents and to make society safer, government should take much into consideration. However, the commendation the author makes id invalid and misleading, basing on my above analysis. The government cannot expect a improved situation about the accidents caused by bicycle. Careful analysis of all the respects I have presented is the best first step to make roads safer.

普渡哥

第一句的that应该用which

竹林中人

ｕｐ