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.”
地方報紙的社論：
通勤者對新的地鐵的使用超過了運輸公司的設計方案。但是，通勤者對運送人們去地鐵站的往返巴士使用低于設計容量。如果運輸公司希望通勤者乘往返巴士而不是開車去地鐵站，他們必須或者降低巴士車費，或者提高地鐵站的停車費。
1. 對原因估計的可能不對.由作者給出的他認為必須執(zhí)行的解決方案來看,作者一定認為人們不坐往返巴士而是開車去地鐵站的原因是巴士車費相對于地鐵站的停車費來說比較貴.To begin with, by concluding that the transit company must either reduce shuttle fares or increase parking fees, the author assumes that these are the only available solutions to the problem of limited shuttle use.但事實原因可能還有很多.例如:巴士的環(huán)境不好速度比較慢中間間隔時間太長車站位置不好等等.
2. 相應的作者所提出的兩個必須要執(zhí)行的解決方案也就不一定實用.應對于上述提到的問題可能一個比較好的解決方案是:對巴士進行裝修把車站設置在更為便利的地方提高巴士的車速縮短時間間隔.
inconvenient shuttle routing and/or scheduling adjust adopt mutually exclusive combination
The author assumes that reducing shuttle fees and increasing parking fees are mutually exclusive alternatives. impose However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice.
1， 沒有排除他因，這兩個是否是的原因
2， 解決方案不是false dilemma。
The author concludes that the local transit company must either reduce fares for the shuttle buses that transport people to their subway stations or increase parking fees at the stations. The reasons offered to support this conclusion are that commuter use of the subway train is exceeding the transit company’s expectations, while commuter use of the shuffle buses is below projected volume. This argument is unconvincing because the author oversimplifies the problem and its solutions in a number of ways.
To begin with, by concluding that the transit company must either reduce shuttle fares or increase parking fees, the author assumes that these are the only available solutions to the problem of limited shuttle use. However, it is possible that other factors—such as inconvenient shuttle routing and/or scheduling, safety concerns, or an increase in carpools—contribute to the problem. If so, adjusting fares or parking fees would might not solve the problem.
In addition, the author assumes that reducing shuttle fees and increasing parking fees are mutually exclusive alternatives. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice. Adjusting both shuttle fares and parking fees might produce better results. Moreover, if the author is wrong in the assumption that parking fees and shuttle fees are the only possible causes of the problem, then the most effective solution might include a complex of policy changes—for example, in shuttle fares, parking fees, rerouting, and rescheduling.
In conclusion, this argument is weak because the author oversimplifies both the problem and its possible solutions. To strengthen the argument the author must examine all factors that might account for the shuttle’s unpopularity. Additionally, the author should consider all possible solutions to determine which combination would bring about the greatest increase in shuttle use.
“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.”
地方報紙的社論：
通勤者對新的地鐵的使用超過了運輸公司的設計方案。但是，通勤者對運送人們去地鐵站的往返巴士使用低于設計容量。如果運輸公司希望通勤者乘往返巴士而不是開車去地鐵站，他們必須或者降低巴士車費，或者提高地鐵站的停車費。
1. 對原因估計的可能不對.由作者給出的他認為必須執(zhí)行的解決方案來看,作者一定認為人們不坐往返巴士而是開車去地鐵站的原因是巴士車費相對于地鐵站的停車費來說比較貴.To begin with, by concluding that the transit company must either reduce shuttle fares or increase parking fees, the author assumes that these are the only available solutions to the problem of limited shuttle use.但事實原因可能還有很多.例如:巴士的環(huán)境不好速度比較慢中間間隔時間太長車站位置不好等等.
2. 相應的作者所提出的兩個必須要執(zhí)行的解決方案也就不一定實用.應對于上述提到的問題可能一個比較好的解決方案是:對巴士進行裝修把車站設置在更為便利的地方提高巴士的車速縮短時間間隔.
inconvenient shuttle routing and/or scheduling adjust adopt mutually exclusive combination
The author assumes that reducing shuttle fees and increasing parking fees are mutually exclusive alternatives. impose However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice.
1， 沒有排除他因，這兩個是否是的原因
2， 解決方案不是false dilemma。
The author concludes that the local transit company must either reduce fares for the shuttle buses that transport people to their subway stations or increase parking fees at the stations. The reasons offered to support this conclusion are that commuter use of the subway train is exceeding the transit company’s expectations, while commuter use of the shuffle buses is below projected volume. This argument is unconvincing because the author oversimplifies the problem and its solutions in a number of ways.
To begin with, by concluding that the transit company must either reduce shuttle fares or increase parking fees, the author assumes that these are the only available solutions to the problem of limited shuttle use. However, it is possible that other factors—such as inconvenient shuttle routing and/or scheduling, safety concerns, or an increase in carpools—contribute to the problem. If so, adjusting fares or parking fees would might not solve the problem.
In addition, the author assumes that reducing shuttle fees and increasing parking fees are mutually exclusive alternatives. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice. Adjusting both shuttle fares and parking fees might produce better results. Moreover, if the author is wrong in the assumption that parking fees and shuttle fees are the only possible causes of the problem, then the most effective solution might include a complex of policy changes—for example, in shuttle fares, parking fees, rerouting, and rescheduling.
In conclusion, this argument is weak because the author oversimplifies both the problem and its possible solutions. To strengthen the argument the author must examine all factors that might account for the shuttle’s unpopularity. Additionally, the author should consider all possible solutions to determine which combination would bring about the greatest increase in shuttle use.