"This past winter, 200 students from Waymarsh State College traveled to the state capitol building to protest against proposed cuts in funding for various state college programs. The other 12,000 Waymarsh students evidently weren't so concerned about their education; they either stayed on campus or left for winter break. Since the group who did not protest is far more numerous, it is more representative of the states college students than the protesters. Therefore, the state legislature need not heed the appeals of the protesting students."
The argument stated in the above paragraph is about a very small number of students protesting against the proposed cuts in the funding for the state colleges. There are a number of proofs on which the argument is based on. This paper first analyses the arguments stated in the excerpt and tries to follow its reasoning. In addition, if there are any further recommendations they are also addressed.
The first reasoning put forward is that out of 12,200 students only 200 thought it necessary to travel to the state capital to protest against the cute in funding for state colleges. What the editor of the newspaper is trying to portray here is that the students are not very much bothered about their tuition fee or rise in it due to cuts in spending for colleges. What appears from their attitude that the majority, a total of 12,000 students either stayed on campus or went home for winter break is that the students are either not mature enough to know the importance of state spending and related cuts or even if they are they don't think that it is important enough or their concern is there but they don't want to travel all the way to the state capital to protest. However the overriding impression that a very small number of students think the action important enough to travel all the way to the state capital to protest against the legislation.
No comments:
Post a Comment