argument 41~~求批改啦~~~

jianzj

写了1个多小时。。。感觉半小时根本就不够的说~~
各位提点意见呗~~
提纲：
1、两个调查之间没有因果关系，但作者强加了。
2、‘戴了帽子就觉得安全，然后就冒险更多’这个推断是没根据的。
3、数据是增长的绝度数字不是增长率。
In order to reduce the number of seriousinjuries from bicycle accidents, the author took out a recommendation thatgovernment should concentrate more on educating people and less on encouragingto wear helmets, which based on two ten-year nationwide studies. Although thisconclusion seemingly looks very useful, the reasoning process is totallyillogical and also base on a series of unwarranted assumptions.


First of all, the author adds the causalrelationship to the two studies: within ten years, the number of people wearinga helmet and the number of bicycle-related accidents. However, in the fact theincreasing number of people who wearing a helmet has absolutely no relevantwith the increasing number of bicycle-related accidents. It just the twodifferent things happened in the same time. So, the author drew a conclusionthat wearing a helmet increases the possibility of getting a accident. Forexample, more and more people like to drive cars instead of walking in the modernlife, in this case whatever the helmets you wore or not the increasing ofaccidents is inevitable. Thus, without ruling out these factors, the authorcannot make such assumption that wearing helmets will lead to increase thepossibility of the accidents.

Second, even if the result thatbicycle-related accidents has increased is caused by wearing helmets, theauthor reached the conclusion that bicyclists feel safer because they arewearing helmets and they take more risks as a result is completely groundless.When bicyclists feel safer and then they take more risks, what kind of evidencecan prove this? We can make a conjecture that people who intend to wear helmetsare always cautious, so that they will not to take risks when bicycling. Therefore,the author's recommendation that the government should focus more on educatingpeople the conscious of safety and less on encouraging them to wear helmets isunfounded.

At the last, we must take the statisticslisted in the passage in to careful consideration. The actual increasing numberof bicycle-related accidents can represent the increasing rate of theaccidents. It means that even though the number of the accidents had increasedto the twice of the past, if the base number also increased significantly, theincreasing rate not necessarily increased. The same problems appeared in otherstatistics in the passage.

In conclusion, the recommendation thatgovernment should strengthen the education but not require citizens wearhelmets is unconvincing. Because it based on a causal relationship between twostudies but in fact they are totally irrelevant, and some unproved assumption, imprecisestatistics also made the reasoning vulnerable.

jianzj

忘记贴题目了。。。
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 bicycle-related accidents 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, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets."
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.

普渡哥

In conclusion, the recommendation thatgovernment should strengthen the education but not require citizens wearhelmets is unconvincing. Because it based on a causal relationship between twostudies but in fact they are totally irrelevant, and some unproved assumption, imprecisestatistics also made the reasoning vulnerable.

because前面用逗号？

jianzj

这样会不会句子太长呀？？还有别的问题咩？？~~~