我的心也許是一個遊牧民族

Argument63 第10篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户 共用时间：33分57秒 338 words
从2004年2月21日13时12分到2004年2月21日13时33分
------题目------
When Stanley Park first opened, it was the largest, most heavily used park in town. It is still the largest park, but it is no longer heavily used. Video cameras mounted in the park's parking lots last month revealed the park's drop in popularity: the recordings showed an average of only 50 cars per day. In contrast, tiny Carlton Park in the heart of the business district is visited by more than 150 people on a typical weekday. An obvious difference is that Carlton Park, unlike Stanley Park, provides ample seating. Thus, if Stanley Park is ever to be as popular with our citizens as is Carlton Park, the town will obviously need to provide more benches, thereby converting some of the unused open areas into spaces suitable for socializing.
------正文------
In this argument, the author asserted that providing more brenches would obiviously attracted people's attention and let Stanley Park as popular as usual. To justify this conclusion, several evidence were used : the number of cars per day in the park's parking decreased, Caltron Park is visited by by more than 150 people on a weekday. These reasons the author cited seems reasonable, however, there are several fallacies existed after my analysis.

In the first place, it isn't persuasive enough to infer that fewer people came to Stanley Park according to the recordings recorded by video cameras. What if people's living standard or style changed? That is to say, more and more people may go to any place on foot and reduce the frequency of driving cars as a result of being aware of air pollution and environment protection issue. Hence, although recordings revealed that only average 50 cars per day in Stanley Park's parking, wihout any further information, the number of people visited it may increased instead of dropping. In other words, the author neglect the possibility of vistiors going on foot.

The relationship between the popularity of Carlton may be not arrtibute its brenches. Because it was located in the heart of the business district, many workers went there intuitively according to distances. Even if Stanley Park was the largest park in town, its bad location or distances obstacled people to go there or had less interest in visiting there. Besides, it is unfair to compare these two parks by using different days -- a typical weekday and a week. Maybe the number of people visiting Caltron Park in weekends was not as many as that of people visiting Stanley Park. Therefore, bias in statistic data made this statement unconvincible.

Moreover, this argument also has an analogy fallacy. The fuctionality of these two parks may significant different: Stanley Park is used to appreciate flowers, plants and other memorial things; Carlton Park is used for people to take a walk and relax their neverous body and mind after working whole day. Admittedly, porviding brenches in Stanley Park might not achieve goals which aimed at attracting more people.

In sum, to let this argument more credible, the author must try to complement fallacies mentioned above, such as figuring out the number of people walking to Stanley Park, differences between these two parks, and so forth.