2. 职称英语
  3. In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports(swimming, boating, and fishing

In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports(swimming, boating, and fishing

游客2024-01-12  7
问题 In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports(swimming, boating, and fishing)among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the rivers water and the rivers smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year’s budget to riverside recreational facilities.
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 the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
选项
答案 While it may be true that the Mason City government ought to devote more money to riverside recreational facilities, this author’s argument does not make a cogent case for increased resources based on river use. It is easy to understand why city residents would want a cleaner river, but this argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to increased funding.
Citing surveys of city residents, the author reports city resident’s love of water sports. It is not clear, however, the scope and validity of that survey. For example, the survey could have asked residents if they prefer using the river for water sports or would like to see a hydroelectric dam built, which may have swayed residents toward river sports. The sample may not have been representative of city residents, asking only those residents who live upon the river.The survey may have been 10 pages long, with 2 questions dedicated to river sports. We just do not know. Unless the survey is fully representative, valid, and reliable, it can not be used to effectively back the author’s argument.
Additionally, the author implies that residents do not use the river for swimming, boating, and fishing, despite their professed interest, because the water is polluted and smelly. While a polluted, smelly river would likely cut down on river sports, a concrete connection between the resident’s lack of river use and the river’s current state is not effectively made. Though there have been complaints, we do not know if there have been numerous complaints from a wide range of people, or perhaps from one or two individuals who made numerous complaints. To strengthen his/her argument, the author would benefit from implementing a normed survey asking a wide range of residents why they do not currently use the river.
Building upon the implication that residents do not use the river due to the quality of the river’s water and the smell, the author suggests that a river clean up will result in increased river usage. If the river’s water quality and smell result from problems which can be cleaned, this may be true. For example, if the decreased water quality and aroma is caused by pollution by factories along the river, this conceivably could be remedied. But if the quality and aroma results from the natural mineral deposits in the water or surrounding rock, this may not be true. There are some bodies of water which emit a strong smell of sulphur due to the geography of the area. This is not something likely to be afffected by a clean-up. Consequently, a river clean up may have no impact upon river usage. Regardless of whether the river’s quality is able to be improved or not, the author does not effectively show a connection between water quality and river usage.
A clean, beautiful, safe river often adds to a city’s property values, leads to increased tourism and revenue from those who come to take advantage of the river, and a better overall quality of life for residents. For these reasons, city government may decide to invest in improving riverside recreational facilities. However, this author’s argument is not likely significantly persuade the city goverment to allocate increased funding.
解析 This argument cites a survey to support the prediction that the use of the Mason River is sure to increase and thus recommends that the city government should devote more money in this year’s budget to the riverside recreational facilities.
In developing your evaluation, you are asked to examine the arguments stated and/or unstated assumptions and discuss what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted. A successful response, then, must discuss both the argument’s assumptions AND the implications of these assumptions for the argument. A response that does not address these aspects of the task will not receive a score of 4 or higher, regardless of the quality of its other features.
Though responses may well raise other points not mentioned here and need not mention all of these points, some assumptions of the argument, and some ways in which the argument depends on those assumptions, include:
    The assumption that people who rank water sports "among their favorite recreational activities" are actually likely to participate in them.(It is possible that they just like to watch them.)This assumption underlies the claim that use of the river for water sports is sure to increase after the state cleans up the Mason River and that the city should for that reason devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
    The assumption that what residents say in surveys can be taken at face value.(It is possible that survey results exaggerate the interest in water sports.)This assumption underlies the claim that use of the river for water sports is sure to increase after the state cleans up the Mason River and that the city should for that reason devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
    The assumption that Mason City residents would actually want to do water sports in the Mason River.(As recreational activities, it is possible that water sports are regarded as pursuits for vacations and weekends away from the city.)This assumption underlies the claim that use of the river for water sports is sure to increase after the state cleans up the Mason River and that the city should for that reason devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
    The assumption that the park department devoting little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities means that these facilities are inadequately maintained. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in this year’s budget to riverside recreational facilities. If current facilities are adequately maintained, then increased funding might not be needed even if recreational use of the river does increase.
    The assumption that the riverside recreational facilities are facilities designed for people who participate in water sports and not some other recreational pursuit. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in this years budget to riverside recreational facilities.
    The assumption that the dirtiness of the river is the cause of its being little used and that cleaning up the river will be sufficient to increase recreational use of the river.(Residents might have complained about the water quality and smell even if they had no desire to boat, swim, or fish in the river.)This assumption underlies the claim that the states plan to clean up the river will result in increased use of the river for water sports.
    The assumption that the complaints about the river are numerous and significant. This assumption motivates the states plan to clean up the river and underlies the claim that use of the river for water sports is sure to increase.(Perhaps the complaints are coming from a very small minority, in which case cleaning the river might be a misuse of state funds.)
    The assumption that the states cleanup will occur soon enough to require adjustments to this year’s budget. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money in this year s budget to riverside recreational facilities.
    The assumption that the cleanup, when it happens, will benefit those parts of the river accessible from the city’s facilities. This assumption underlies the claim that the city should devote more money to riverside recreational facilities.
    The assumption that the city government ought to devote more attention to maintaining a recreational facility if demand for that facility increases.
    The assumption that the city should finance the new project and not some other agency or group(public or private).
Should one or more of the above assumptions prove unwarranted, the implications for the argument are that:
    the logic of the argument falls apart/ is invalid/ is unsound.
    the state and city are spending their funds unnecessarily.
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3356942.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)