劉文勇GRE寫作Argument題庫 Day 142

Day 142 Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment

Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, the statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.

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 these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

五問：

（1）“Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.)”是事實，“Clearly, the statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident”是結論，值得反駁嗎？

（2）受傷了就一定要去 emergency room嗎？換句話說，這個調查的取樣是否可能存在問題？例如：有些人雖然穿了護具但是受傷了，又沒去 emergency room，如果這樣的情況很多，就會影響結論。

（3）文中提及了百分比（ 75 percent），在沒有提供具體數量的情況下，百分比數字是否具有足夠的說服力？而且，發(fā)生事故的主要原因一定是沒有穿戴防護裝備和反光設備嗎？可能是輪滑者技術欠佳，做出一些危險動作或者比較粗心大意。另外，僅提及這 75%的人，卻不討論剩下的 25%，犯了我們常說的 impressed by large numbers的錯誤。

（4）重要的一點是，在意外事故中受傷的人未必是從事輪滑運動的人，如果傷者是行人，那么原文中強調的保護措施和反光材料是否有效？這種保護是否雙向的？輪滑者速度過快有可能會撞到行人，輪滑者戴頭盔、護膝并不會使行人免于受傷；而且行人也有可能會忽視輪滑者配備的反光設備。

（5）文中的調查強調了事故發(fā)生區(qū)域是街道與停車場，輪滑者是否可能在其他場所受傷？例如：小區(qū)、斜坡、河邊。那文中所提及的防護措施還有效嗎？文中是否給出了足夠的信息來證明這一點？若是掉進河里，護具也不會起到很大的作用。