劉文勇GRE寫作Argument題庫 Day 71

Day 71 Traffic here in Waymarsh is becoming a problem

The following is a letter to the editor of the Waymarsh Times.

“Traffic here in Waymarsh is becoming a problem. Although just three years ago a state traffic survey showed that the typical driving commuter took 20 minutes to get to work, the commute now takes closer to 40 minutes, according to the survey just completed. Members of the town council already have suggested more road building to address the problem, but as well as being expensive, the new construction will surely disrupt some of our residential neighborhoods. It would be better to follow the example of the nearby city of Garville. Last year Garville implemented a policy that rewards people who share rides to work, giving them coupons for free gas. Pollution levels in Garville have dropped since the policy was implemented, and people from Garville tell me that commuting times have fallen considerably. There is no reason why a policy like Garville's shouldn't work equally well in Waymarsh.”

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

五問：

（1）“Traffic here in Waymarsh is becoming a problem. Although just three years ago a state traffic survey showed that the typical driving commuter took 20 minutes to get to work, the commute now takes closer to 40 minutes, according to the survey just completed”和“Last year Garville implemented a policy that rewards people who share rides to work, giving them coupons for free gas. Pollution levels in Garville have dropped since the policy was implemented, and people from Garville tell me that commuting times have fallen considerably”是事實， “It would be better to follow the example of the nearby city of Garville”是結論，值得反駁嗎？

（2）本文屬于典型的類比式論證，請同學們回顧一下：什么樣的類比論證才是可行的？對比對象之間需要達成什么樣的條件？原文在論述 Waymarsh與Garville時，應該分別提供哪些信息才能促使類比成立？比如兩地的人口密度、車輛擁有量、道路上的車輛構成（即上班族的車占總車流量的比例）一致。原文是否提供了這些信息？并沒有。

（3）在論述 Waymarsh的交通問題時，原文提到了兩個調查，請大家仔細分析一下：三年前的調查和現在的調查是否可以進行對比呢？情況和條件一致嗎？調查的目標人群是一樣的嗎？居住地和上班地點的距離是一樣的嗎？通勤時間變長了一定是因為交通問題嗎？有沒有可能是工作地點或居住地點改變了，或者是道路施工導致擁堵？

（4）一項費用高昂的、可能會影響居民生活的政策就一定是不好的嗎？是否執(zhí)行一項政策，需要考慮哪些方面？除了上述兩方面之外，其他方面是否也應該被考慮到呢？比如：這項政策是否能夠產生長遠的影響？是否可能一勞永逸地解決眼下的問題？

（5）Garville的污染等級下降一定是因為該項政策的實施嗎？是否可能有其他原因？例如：對環(huán)境污染的治理加強，經濟產業(yè)的轉型等。另外，獎勵免費油票是否可能會吸引那些原本騎自行車上班的人，從而導致開車的人更多了？收入水平的不同會不會使人們對待免費油票的態(tài)度也不同？