Argument 147 超超高频

khwUID: 162559

第一篇,大家随便拍,别客气.

Argument 147
In this editorial the author conclude that after two years declining of the sales of the Whirlwind video games based on a vague survey, the sales trend is about to reverse. To support his conclusion, the author points out that an extensive advertisement campaign is going on for several Whirlwind introduced video games which will be popular to the consumers. At the first glance, the argument seems plausible, but a careful examination of the argument would reveal that how groundless the conclusion is.

In the first place, the author based his conclusion on a survey which is very vague and suspicious. The author provides no assurance that the survey is statistically reliable. Moreover, we don't even know who leads the survey from the very beginning. It is very possible that the survey was made by someone whose interest involved into the business, and this can severely weaken the reliability of the survey itself.

In the second place, the author unfairly assumes that the new video games with lifelike graphic will succeed in the game market. The author points out that the survey which the argument is based on reveals that the games with lifelike graphic are preferred by the consumers. Even if this is true, it can not prove these kinds of preference along can make people willing to purchase the state-of-the-art game products and up-to-date computer hardware which can be very expensive both. Maybe the consumers will satisfied to play with the old traditional games think about the big amount of money they can save, considering that the majority consumers of the computer games are people 10 to 25 years old.


Last but not the least, even if the author can substantiate the foregoing assumptions, there is still no guarantee of dramatically increase of sales of Whirlwind video games. If the market of the lifelike graphic video games is so promising, it is very possible that other game companies will also try to enter into this area, which can make the competition of the video game market very fierce. Maybe some other companies have very good products and plans to put more money to advertise those products. It is also very possible that some products of other companies already take up this profitable game market, and game players are very loyal to them. In any case above or the combination of them can render to conclusion of the author to hasty and ungrounded.

In sum, the editorial is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author need to present more thorough investigation of the game market and better logical reasoning to the conclusion. To better evaluate the argument, we should need to know more detail about the survey in the argument, and further information of difference respect of the argument.

hokuto8UID: 2188958

我17号考试，考完再帮你看。

hokuto8UID: 2188958

看了，语言词句上没有太大的问题。
但是写作的方法上不太对。

argu是仅仅是要你支持出作者的逻辑错误吗？你的第一段关于survey的完全是点到为止，太客气了，你不是他的领导，你不是视察他的工作，不是要你给他提出大方向上的、原则性的意见。狠狠地批它，告诉他具体的问题。用事实说话，反例是最实用、最有力的，就像科学研究中说的：What remains is not necessarily something true, but something which has not yet been proved false. 只要有一个反例，作者的结论就会被动摇，当你发现一只白乌鸦时，天下乌鸦一般黑的结论就要被重新检验，要么否定那白乌鸦是自然的，要么修正结论，可能还有其他办法；但是不可否认的是反例的动摇性作用。

还有你的开头，我在机考中发现，如果题目不是很熟悉的，要用restate开头其实是很费时间的，要找出论证与论据，很耽误事，而且这些内容起不了多少作用，有时间不如在正文把批驳进行的彻底些。

另外，模版的痕迹过重了，这些套话会减慢文章的行进速度，减弱文章的批驳气势。尤其是一长句套话后跟的内容只是the survey is too vague and suspicious， 请问：究竟是作者列出具体数据的survey比较vague and suspicious， 还是你的本应该起到一针见血指出错误的作用、却写成这样的TS比较vague and suspicious？
过重的模版会让你的文章充满了老学究的气味，你的所有思想都被它掩埋，文章也干巴巴的。建议除了必要的连词，如maybe，perhaps及指出错误的关键词，如unreliable， cannot represent，other factors，possibility一类的词组以外，不要用整句充满没有实际价值的信息的长句。