analyzing an argument . By Riham

RIHAM ABUZINADAH

MAY 21, 2014

ACADEMIC WRITING

Analyzing a Short Argument

                In a letter to the editor, Robert Raywift, the writer argues that overnight parking should be removed, especially from 2 a.m. to 6 p.m. for some causes that was mentioned in this letter. In the writer’s letter, there are some fallacies that I could figure, and I would like to represent some of them and explain why they are wrong.

                First, the author states that when someone park at night, it is similar to the case that he has a garage in the street, which is against the law. I think this argument is wrong and I can say that it is a false analogy, since the author compares to things that are irrelevant to each other. More clearly, parking overnight is something totally different from having a garage because when you have a garage, you own it and it is totally yours; however, when the person park at night, that would be just for a certain amount of time and he will not own the place.

                Second, the author argues that if people do not agree with his argument, they are not intelligent. Also, he says that if they are intelligent, then they should put into account that overnight parking has to be eliminated. I believe that this statement is not suitable, for the writer intimidated the audience and discourages an open discussion. In addition, it is inappropriate to describe those who are against the issue as not intelligent individuals.

                In the author’s third argument, he indicates about the experiment that has been done by the Chief of Police, Burgess Jones, who did the experiment about the overnight parking. He prohibited cars parking from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. So, he mentioned that during the four hours there was not one accident recorded. This argument is weak because the experiment was done in a short time, which I could consider it a false cause because the period of the experiment is not quite enough to be generalized.

                The forth argument indicates that there is no need to make such solution for overnight parking, since they believe that streets are safe enough at night. On the other hand, the author attacks these people by claiming that they do not have any idea about the safety procedures. Therefore, I think this is a straw man fallacy as he attacks people without giving them the chance to argue.

                Finally, the author provides an argument of two people, Kenneth Taylor and Police Chief, who assert that prohibiting parking from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. is the best way to inhibit overnight parking. I believe that this is a wrong argument and can be considered begging a question because he does not provide any solution, but he is circling around the same issue.