Analyze an Argument

Published: 2020-04-27 10:17:49
591 words
2 pages
5 min to read
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

The proponent in this discourse contends that the number of rental mopeds should be limited by the Council of Balmer Island so that the number of accidents taking place could be reduced. At a glance, such a contention may sound reasonable, but in reality, it is a harsh statement. Outlined below are some reasons why it is harsh.

There is a presumption on the part of the proponent that mopeds are responsible for the accidents involving pedestrians. The pedestrian is never at fault. Although this assumption may be correct, there is no evidence the proponent advance to back up this claim. However, the likelihood that pedestrians may be breaking the law is not farfetched. For example, there exists the possibility that the pedestrians may not be obeying the red signal lights before crossing the road. This may have led to some of the accidents. In my opinion, the arguments advanced contain many flaws and had no credibility due to lack of concrete evidence. I do not accept the argument put forth by the proponent as other scenarios could also be the cause of the accidents.

The proponent also contends that the reduction in the number of mopeds by 50% will lead to a corresponding decrease in the number of accidents by 50%. There is no citation or explanation as to from where these statistics came. This is no way to prove or disprove this assumption, and the proponent did not offer any evidence to attest to the validity of the statement. It might turn out that the reduction in the number of mopeds, rather than decreasing the number of accidents, would actually lead to an increase. Let us analyze this example further to illustrate this point more clearly. Drivers, for instance, increase the speed at which they operate their vehicles whenever there is less traffic. Such increases in speed may result in accidents since higher driving faster is typically associated with higher accident rates. By not taking this into consideration and discarding any other alternative explanations, the proponent has no real evident to support this contention and the recommendation.

A final point, although not the least important one, is the fact that even if evidence exists to support the stated assumption, the proponent cannot logically jump to the conclusion regarding mopeds by assuming that a limited number of rental mopeds will result in decreasing the number of mopeds on the road. The proponent presents no conclusive scientific proof or anecdotal evidence to give credence to the assumption advanced. It may not be farfetched to conclude that what the proponent's imagination created the results he cites and these findings would not occur in reality. There is a possibility that the rental mopeds account for only a minute percentage of the total number of mopeds in Balmer Island. For others to accept this conclusion, the proponent must present an explanation as to why these alternatives should be discounted and why the proponent's statistical evidence should be accepted. .

To conclude, the above argument advanced by the proponent has no reliable evidence or logical conclusions upon which to base the contention that the number of rental mopeds on Balmer Island should be limited. None of the arguments used have any certifiable facts to support this argument. As a way of drawing a better conclusion, the proponent should develop a more persuasive proposal, backed by solid facts and statistics that allow for all other possible scenarios. Then the proponent will have a better chance of persuading the Council of Balmer Island and others that the proposal is sound.


Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: