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." Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The author concludes that the transit company must reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the parking fees at the subway station to encourage more people to take the shuttle buses to the subway station. However, the conclusion relies on assumptions for which the author does not supply clear evidence to be convincing.
Most conspicuously, the author assumes, but not proves, that all subway passengers need to either take the shuttle bus or drive to get to the subway station. However, there are a lot of reasons that this assumption might not be true. For example, if many people live within the walking distance of the subway station, reducing the bus fares or increasing the parking fees won't do much good.
In addition, the author does not address the possibility of other contributing factors to the lower then projected shuttle bus usage. For example, if the shuttle bus comes by each pick up area every two hours, some commuters may decide to drive no matter how cheap the bus fares are.
To strengthen the argument, the author must provide several pieces of evidence to support his assumptions. First of all, the author's implicit argument that the lowering shuttle bus fares or increasing parking fees will increase commuter usage of the shuttle buses could be strengthened by providing evidence that all commuters using the subway must either take the buses or drive to get to the station. Furthermore, the author could make a stronger case by proving there are no other factors that are preventing commuters from taking the shuttle bus to the subway station, other than costs. All things considered, the author's conclusion is not completely sound or persuasive as it relies too heavily on unsupported assumptions.
The author concludes that the transit company must reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the parking fees at the subway station to encourage more people to take the shuttle buses to the subway station. However, the conclusion relies on assumptions for which the author does not supply clear evidence to be convincing.
Most conspicuously, the author assumes, but not proves, that all subway passengers need to either take the shuttle bus or drive to get to the subway station. However, there are a lot of reasons that this assumption might not be true. For example, if many people live within the walking distance of the subway station, reducing the bus fares or increasing the parking fees won't do much good.
In addition, the author does not address the possibility of other contributing factors to the lower then projected shuttle bus usage. For example, if the shuttle bus comes by each pick up area every two hours, some commuters may decide to drive no matter how cheap the bus fares are.
To strengthen the argument, the author must provide several pieces of evidence to support his assumptions. First of all, the author's implicit argument that the lowering shuttle bus fares or increasing parking fees will increase commuter usage of the shuttle buses could be strengthened by providing evidence that all commuters using the subway must either take the buses or drive to get to the station. Furthermore, the author could make a stronger case by proving there are no other factors that are preventing commuters from taking the shuttle bus to the subway station, other than costs. All things considered, the author's conclusion is not completely sound or persuasive as it relies too heavily on unsupported assumptions.
