First of all, does the recent survey reflect all the consumers' real position? The author advocates that over 80 percent of the respondents to this survey indicated a desire to reduce their intake of foods containing fats and cholesterol. But we cannot say all the consumers of this company do not like the foods containing high fats and cholesterol.（质疑调查结果的有效性。但是我个人认为哈，这个调查结果本来就不需要反映所有消费者的立场，它的假设是这百分之八十真实有效的反映了市场上大多数消费者的消费意愿，所以这点才是需要质疑的，所以这个all用在这里我觉得有点不太准确） Maybe the respondents just account for a small proportion of all consumers and other consumers are also fond of high fats and cholesterol foods. It is also very likely that although these respondents indicated that they desire to reduce fats and cholesterol, but they still buy the foods with high fats and cholesterol because they cannot resist the attract of the high fats and cholesterol foods. The author's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely。
Besides, do the sales and profits of the company must be decrease?（这句语法错误••） There is no guarantee thatit is necessarily the case, and the author does not supply any evidence to confirm this assumption（这句有点罗嗦）. It is quite possible that the quality of this company's food products is very outstanding and the price of the food is very low and the consumers （are）still attract(ed) by these products. Even though the sales and the profits of the food high in fat and cholesterol be influenced（这句是让步？）, the Old Dairy Industries may have other products and the food high in fat and cholesterol just take little percent of their all products. Without accounting for and ruling out（有点累赘） these and other alternative explanations, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.
Last but not least, even if the evidence turns to support the foregoing assumptions, the author false to persuade the Old Dairy stockholders to sell their shares, and other investors not to purchase stock in this company. It is reasonable to doubt that what the author's opinion will not happen in reality（这句感觉有点问题）. It is just possible that the company has newly development（developed？） projects and these projects are very suitable for the trends of the food market. Maybe the profits of the company will be improved significantly and the stock price of this company will also be increase. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must explain why this explain is unavailable.
To sum up, the author's argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should reason more convincingly and answer the questions above persuasively.
本帖最后由 gengshu 于 2011-9-11 21:19 编辑
Argument 76 （修改稿）
”Over 80 percent of the respondents to a recent survey indicated a desire to reduce their intake of foods containing fats and cholesterol, and today low-fat products abound in many food stores. Since many of the food products currently marketed by Old Dairy Industries are high in fat and cholesterol, the company's sales are likely to diminish greatly and company profits will no doubt decrease. We therefore advise Old Dairy stockholders to sell their shares, and other investors not to purchase stock in this company.
In this argument, the author indicates that the Old Dairy Industries’ sales are likely to diminish greatly and their stockholders should sell their shares and other investors not to purchase stock in this company. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, a lot of questions should be answered.
First of all, does the recent survey reflect have its effectiveness? The author advocates that over 80 percent of the respondents to this survey indicated a desire to reduce their intake of foods containing fats and cholesterol. But we cannot say most of the consumers who receive the survey do not like the foods containing high fats and cholesterol. Maybe the respondents just account for a small proportion of all consumers and other consumers are also fond of high fats and cholesterol foods. It is also very likely that although these respondents indicated that they desire to reduce fats and cholesterol, but they still buy the foods with high fats and cholesterol because they cannot resist the attraction of the high fats and cholesterol foods. The author's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.
Besides, do the sales and profits of the company must be decrease? There is no guarantee that it is necessarily the case, and the author does not supply any evidence to confirm this assumption. It is quite possible that the quality of this company's food products is very outstanding and the price of the food is very low and the consumers are still attracted by these products. Even though the sales and the profits of the food high in fat and cholesterol be influenced, the Old Dairy Industries may have other products and the food high in fat and cholesterol just take little percent of their all products. Without accounting for and ruling out these and other alternative explanations, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.
Last but not least, even if the evidence turns to support the foregoing assumptions, the author false to persuade the Old Dairy stockholders to sell their shares, and other investors not to purchase stock in this company. It is reasonable to doubt that the author's opinion will not happen in reality. It is just possible that the company has newly developmental projects and these projects are very suitable for the trends of the food market. Maybe the profits of the company will be improved significantly and the stock price of this company will also be increase. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must explain why this explain is unavailable.
To sum up, the author's argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should reason more convincingly and answer the questions above persuasively.
Issue 60（原稿）
Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.
The speaker approves that politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals. I partly agree with the speaker's opinion. But may be in some circumstances ideals of the politicians have their significance.
I must firstly say that politicians should satisfy most people's needs. That means they must pursue common ground and reasonable consensus as the speaker says because the politics of a nation is to ensure the nation runs with a minimum of contention. Take China as an example, the politicians of China excessively emphasize the rapid development of the nation in recent twenty or thirty years. Nowadays, the strength of the country is improved rapidly and the international position of China has also enhanced a lot. China has become a country with powerful ability on industry and agriculture. But it is a serious problem that the gap between rich and poor also becomes very big which makes most people's life quality very low. If the politics of China cannot resolve this problem, the development of China must be influenced significantly in the long run.
But may be sometimes, some ideas cannot be admitted with most people of a nation, but these ideas are totally right and reasonable. In the history of American, the position of black people is very low; they usually discriminate by other citizens. The white man or woman may have reach a consensus that the black people should earn less money and do the labor work which is more toilsome. These circumstances change little until the civil rights movement which is led by Martin Luther King. He recommended the idea that black people should enjoy the equal right with other citizens. But these ideas cannot be accept by most citizens of American in that time. Nowadays with the improvement of the position of black people, the society of American has become more harmonious which prove the idea of Martin Luther King is right.
In conclusion, the politicians should satisfy most people of their nations to ensure the stability of the nations but at the same time accept some ideas to guarantee the development the their nations.
The speaker approves that politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensusrather than elusive ideals. I partly agree with the speaker's opinion. But maybe in some circumstances ideals of the politicians感觉这么表达不好 have their significance.作者观点：部分同意；在一些情况下政治家的理想也重要。
I must firstly say that politicians should satisfy most people's needs. That means they mustpursue common ground and reasonable consensus as the speaker says because the politics of a nation is to ensure the nation runs with a minimum of contention.我觉得政治的目的可能有待商榷Take China as an example, the politicians of China excessively emphasize therapid development of the nation in recent twenty or thirty years. Nowadays, the strength of the country is 加being improved rapidly and the international position of China has also 加been enhanced a lot. China has become a country with powerful ability on industry and agriculture. But it is a serious problem that the gap betweenrich and poor also becomes very big（改成significant感觉更好） which makes most people's life quality verylow.(which lowers XXX 感觉更好) If the politics of China cannot resolve this problem, the development ofChina must be influenced significantly in the long run.
政治家应该先满足人们的需求。 题目中是 共同点/共同基础和理性的一致，我觉得这一段没有体现出来；或者说 缺少相应叙述表明 人民的对XX的需求是 共同点/共同基础和理性的一致？举例说虽然中国现在国力强大，但是贫富差距很大，大多数人的生活水平很低。从段落上说感觉例子和主题句联系不够，需要改写或补充叙述。
But maybe sometimes, some ideas（题目是ideal ）cannot be admitted with(by) most people不被人民承认？我觉得这个和题目的表述有差别 of a nation, but(一句有两个but) these ideas are totally right and reasonable. In the history of American(America), the position of black people is very low; they 加are usually discriminated by other citizens. The white man or woman(复述) may have reach a consensus that the black people should earn less money and do the labor work which is more toilsome.These circumstances change little until the civil rights movement which is ledby Martin Luther King. He recommended the idea that black people should enjoy the equal rights with(like好点？) other citizens. But these ideas cannot be accept by most citizens of American(American citizens) in that time. Nowadays with the improvement of the position of black people, the society of American(American society) has become more harmonious, which proves the idea of Martin Luther King is right.
马丁路德金不是政治家吧，他应该算activist。。所以这个例子感觉不恰当。
In conclusion, the politicians should satisfy most people of their nations to ensure the stability of the nations but at the same time accept some ideas to guaranteethe development the their nations.政治家应该满足大多数人民的需求来保证稳定(我觉得这个和题目表述差距有点大），同时接受一些想法来保证国家的发展(题目是追求理想)
主要觉得第一点那里表述有点问题；第二点的例子不恰当
个人观点，不对的请指正~欢迎讨论~