The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper."Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lob

Essay topics:

The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

"Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway, adding an additional lane of traffic. But last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. A better alternative is to add a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute, and so would reduce rush-hour traffic rather than fostering an increase."

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.

The writer discusses about a strategy to reduce traffic congestions on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center. He rejects to add an additional lane of traffic, since it was applied for Green Highway last year and was not seccessful in suppressing traffic. He concludes to add a bicycle lane since people are fond of riding a bicycle. However, this conclusion cannot be accepted as it rests on a number of assumptions which can be challenged in one way or another.

The first problem with this argument is that the writer assumes that Green Highway and Blue Highway are identical in all respects. However, there may were several other factors in Green Highway which made the method unsuccessful, such as: the low quality of the new lane.

Another problem with this argument is that the writer assumes things to remain unchanged over the years. However, there is not any evidence to definitely prove that all the conditions in the last year and the current year were the same. For examlpe, maybe there was an increase in the population of commuters which made the traffic worse.

A third problem with this argument is that the writer believes that since people are enthusiastic to ride bicycles, they will welcome a bicycle lane and will be encouraged to ride bicycles. However, it should be noted that it can be very exhausting and time consuming to ride a bicycle between the suburbs and the city center.Therefor, there is a high probability that people do not welcome this choice and the lane of bicycle remains useless while it will cost the government a high price to pay.

As a final analysis, this conclusion cannot be taken to be correct, because as it was argued above it depends on a number of assumptions which are dubious. It can be accepted only if the weaknesses already referred to are all removed.

Votes
Average: 6 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

there is not any evidence
there is no any evidence

Sentence: He rejects to add an additional lane of traffic, since it was applied for Green Highway last year and was not seccessful in suppressing traffic.
Error: seccessful Suggestion: successful

Sentence: For examlpe, maybe there was an increase in the population of commuters which made the traffic worse.
Error: examlpe Suggestion: example

----------------
argument 1 -- OK

argument 2 -- OK

argument 3 -- OK
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 317 350
No. of Different Words: 149

More content wanted.
For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.

---------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 317 350
No. of Characters: 1480 1500
No. of Different Words: 149 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.22 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.669 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.496 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 107 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 86 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 40 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 25 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.385 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.389 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.538 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.358 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.634 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5