蹬蹬蹬～0906G同主题ARGUMENT143又来啦

irvine666UID：2575525

Today we will discuss a correspondingly simple and easy ARGUMENT: NO.143

The context of this argument is related to the rate of unemployment and the staff reduction. In the background of economic crisis, I believe it would be an interesting topic for us to ponder, and maybe, some of you could discover an effective approach to solve this persistent social problem by penetrating and insightful thought.

NO TIME NO WASTE, LET'S GO.

TOPIC: ARGUMENT143 - The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.

Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading. The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this impression is contradicted by a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time.

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.

Step one: Reading the passage.
(The primary purpose in this section is to distinguish the hypothesis, the inference, and the conclusion of the argument.)

Obviously, this argument is constituted by 3 parts of statement:

Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading.

The first part is the conclusion of the author:

Pay attention to the key words, article and misleading, and try to reflect initial impression in mind that the argument is utilized to retort upon certain article. Which article? The author demonstrated it subsequently.

many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment.

The second part is the content of article being regarded as the mistaken impression by the author:

We might be confused at first glance by the word "downsizing". Fortunately, the author provided its precise definition at the end of article: Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees. Here, another key word should be placed emphasis on -- deliberately. Therefore, by synthesizing the two sentences, we could make it clear that the article held a critical and negative attitude toward unnecessary staff reduction of corporations and illustrated tough lives of the unemployed in the hard time; however, the author did not agree with it, for the reasons showed as below:

a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time.

The third part is the evidence and deduction of the author:

Before commencing discussing it, there exists a controversial question to deliberate carefully: should we suspect the survey of lacking sufficient number of respondents, restraining in particular group of community, and so on? As far as I concerned, for its function of employing fundamental evidence of the deduction of the author, I strongly recommend you to skip this issue and to merely consider it as the background information, or, the hypothesis of this argument.

Now we turn to the essential content of this part. The author brought forth three reasons grounding on the survey:
1. Far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated.
2. Many of those who lost jobs have found new employment.
3. Most of the newly created jobs have been paid above-average wages and almost all of them are full-time job.

Step two: Analyzing the logic chain.
(This section is to serve as a graphics for the logical flaws of this argument)

As is mentioned above, the author provided three factors illustrated by the survey. Each of them is used to prove his/her conclusion. Therefore, we could safely draw the logical construction of this argument as below:

        reason 1--|

        reason 2--|-->conclusion

        reason 3--|

This logic chain, simple and parallel as it is, should be contradicted respectively and then synthesized to break down the author's standpoint.  

Step three: Find out flaws.

(This section will illustrate all possible logical problems of this argument)

Now, we could be able to organize our order of refuting and valid contentions:

Retorting reason 1: Could the rate of job-increase in proportion to the rate of population growth? Does the number of jobs indeed meet the need of the American? The author merely referred to an abstract phrase "far more" instead of precise rate. In addition, the so-called far more jobs would not be only provided for someone who lost jobs; workers who master a special skill and the undergraduates could also share the same opportunity as the unemployed.
Retorting reason 2: The author failed to provide the average time spent of the unemployed in finding another job. He/She also overlooked the living standard of the unemployed citizens during their hunting job period.
Retorting reason 3: It would be an open question that whether the rest one-third residents should be intentionally neglected. The author undeserved slipped the treatment level and working condition of them. Besides, the ratio of part-time job deserves to take into consideration.

Attention please: The logical structure of this argument is coordinate construction, the relationship among the paragraphs would be less persuasive to utilize concessive clause.
You could find more detailed excuses in https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=921368&highlight

Step four: Further speculation.
(In this section, there is a interesting question, endeavor your best to solve it. Pay more perspiration, you will thus obtain more inspiration)

From first to last, the author only focused on the word "job" itself to express his position. However, the content of the article also mentioned the action of downsizing. Since the author failed to consider this issue, we could confidently conclude that he/she acquiesced in the rationality of downsizing. The red-color sentence should be regarded as a hidden hypothesis of the argument. If, for instance, we primarily argued this hidden hypothesis, could we be able to give the author a "Critical Strike"?

References: I am glad to recommendate all of you an article solving similar type of argument. The link of that classic essay is provided here: https://bbs.gter.net/thread-416323-1-1.html. Hope it helps, good luck!

Thanks for reading!

                                                                                               The end.

irvine666UID：2575525

咳，为了鼓励积极参与的板油，前3篇Argument偶都会仔细的帮你们批改，后面的也会简要的批～欢迎大家参与！

作业链接～

--------------------------------------前三篇---------------------------------------
lionheart2010 的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-928944-1-1.html DONE
同心砥砺         的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-928970-1-1.html DONE
G考小冰          的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-928988-1-1.html DONE

--------------------------------------其他-----------------------------------------
mingzi12390   的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-929100-1-1.html DONE
好困想睡觉       的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-929229-1-1.html DONE
kk002            的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-929703-1-1.html DONE
pan1986        的 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-929401-1-1.html UNDONE抱歉这篇的语法错误实在是太太太多了，而且句子结构有很大的问题，我大概看了半篇，发现都在大段的纠正句子结构错误，没有理解你所表达的内容。因此我放弃了继续批改。我建议你先恶补一下高中的语法，尤其是句子的～然后做到能够用句子准确的表达自己的意思，再PM我来看逻辑～。

草木也知愁UID：2487572

1

1
1

新手区汇总楼层

1
ddcmj519  https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=929537&extra=

joyceww88 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=930727&extra=

seiranzcc1 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=930792&extra=

yyx017 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=931814&extra=

Alex_2009 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=931845&extra=

PassonChen https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=932266&extra=

winning1030 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=932412&extra=

刚刚好 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=932419&extra=
1
米饭袜子 https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=932418&extra=
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

sakuraanneUID：2253519

占楼

grekokomoUID：2441677

噔噔噔,怕怕的干炸小排骨;P
咳咳,占楼~

奔跑蜗牛UID：2579189

地下室都米有抢到

lionheart2010UID：2602519

Homework Link
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=928944&extra=

ddcmj519UID：176326

第一页。。俺满足了。。

mingzi12390UID：2559903

还能参加吗

草木也知愁UID：2487572

能 刚开始才

同心砥砺UID：2600324

积极响应

https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-928970-1-1.html

自改过了一遍，总体感觉这篇还是蛮难得
主要是觉得在这一句

“The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment.”

的理解上有问题。不知道作者质疑原文章的重心在哪？
是downsizing, 是face economic hardship for years, 还是finding other suitable jobs?

我文中选择了face economic hardship for years

另外，作者好像除了说原文章产生的那种印象与报告中情况有矛盾外，没有具体显示他的推理过程，所以又有一处难点

总之，但愿考试别抽到类似的题目，抽到了也是改过的，阿米托佛~

saavedroUID：2423190

来支持你啦~~！@

G考小冰UID：2601548

https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=928988&extra=

算前三名吗~~~666狠改吧  THANKS~~~

irvine666UID：2575525

前面3篇已经批完，各位注意查阅，后面发文的童鞋也不用担心，偶一样会尽量给你们批的
---------------------------------------咳咳------------------------------------
注意了，首先发贴需要按照格式来，其次，分类里面各位一定要选择：同主题temp~

mingzi12390UID：2559903

占位交作业
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-929100-1-1.html

thanks