The argument to be analyzed is as follows:
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 unstated
assumptions of the argument above
and
·
explain how the argument
depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions
prove unwarranted
There are a lot of unstated assumptions and conclusions drawn out are unwarranted for number of skaters visiting Emergency Rooms in hospitals.The author here tries to convey that in accordance with Hospital statistics for skaters are getting more injured due to their carelessness in wearing protective equipment. For supporting this argument an example of statistics is been stated that 75 percent were not wearing any protective equipment. To avoid such severe injuries skaters are recommended for wearing protective equipment.
The author has shown concern for skaters who get severe injuries. Author's assumptions that 75 percent of skaters did not wear any equipment hence they lead to such contingency of accident but that conclusion needs to consider some other factors too. There are chances that with wearing such protective equipment skaters get some protection but as the skaters roll in streets and parking lots may be more busy having lot of traffic causing damage to skaters even after wearing protective equipment. Moreover the skaters may be rolling very carelessly into the areas where they should not. For just being enthusiastic for performing stunts they roll over such areas where even the protective equipment may not save them from any calamity.
Assumptions made by author again needs to be amended. The skaters instead of rolling in busy streets and busy parking lots must switch over to special skating grounds which have such infrastructure for performing whatever acrobatics they want.The author again recommends for such costly sophisticated lightweight protective equipment but skaters may not be in such position to spend heavily in for this. Again author assumes that just following these safety measure of protective equipment;skaters will reduce the probability of severe accident. Still a lot more things needs to be considered. Statistics collected must be more precise and detailed for other venues too and also mention about skaters.
Finally the assumptions made by the author needs to be amended and revised as just by wearing such protective equipment may not reduce severe injuries,it may up to certain extent only. Author must also recommend the skaters for not skating in such busy locations where we find more rush and traffic. Even after wearing such protective equipment there are chances of any calamity which cant be ignored and here it has been ignored by the author. The conclusion drawn by author has also neglected the overenthusiastic skaters who carelessly perform almost impossible feats which ultimately lead them to severe accidents.
The author has shown concern for skaters who get severe injuries. Author's assumptions that 75 percent of skaters did not wear any equipment hence they lead to such contingency of accident but that conclusion needs to consider some other factors too. There are chances that with wearing such protective equipment skaters get some protection but as the skaters roll in streets and parking lots may be more busy having lot of traffic causing damage to skaters even after wearing protective equipment. Moreover the skaters may be rolling very carelessly into the areas where they should not. For just being enthusiastic for performing stunts they roll over such areas where even the protective equipment may not save them from any calamity.
Assumptions made by author again needs to be amended. The skaters instead of rolling in busy streets and busy parking lots must switch over to special skating grounds which have such infrastructure for performing whatever acrobatics they want.The author again recommends for such costly sophisticated lightweight protective equipment but skaters may not be in such position to spend heavily in for this. Again author assumes that just following these safety measure of protective equipment;skaters will reduce the probability of severe accident. Still a lot more things needs to be considered. Statistics collected must be more precise and detailed for other venues too and also mention about skaters.
Finally the assumptions made by the author needs to be amended and revised as just by wearing such protective equipment may not reduce severe injuries,it may up to certain extent only. Author must also recommend the skaters for not skating in such busy locations where we find more rush and traffic. Even after wearing such protective equipment there are chances of any calamity which cant be ignored and here it has been ignored by the author. The conclusion drawn by author has also neglected the overenthusiastic skaters who carelessly perform almost impossible feats which ultimately lead them to severe accidents.
0 Comments