[a习作temp] argument153 超时五分钟~~~~ [复制链接]

bunnymz2005
UID??2146758

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 718
注册时间: 2005-10-11
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2006-2-9 20:00:38 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Argument153
题目
Argument153 The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper.

"Ever since the 1950's, when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer, over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time television—programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m.—should show less violence. Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."
***********************************************************
翻译：
20世纪50年代电视开始出现在平常家庭以来，Alta的青少年犯罪发生率也在稳步增加。这种青少年犯罪的增加和电视中暴力节目的增加相对应。根据几次全国调查，那些看了大量含有暴力镜头的节目的很小的儿童比那些不看暴力节目的儿童在家庭环境中表现出更多的暴力行为。而且，在一次由Observer所举行的调查中，超过90％的回应者是那些指出黄金时段的电视节目（晚上7点－9点的节目）应该少播放暴力的家长。因此，为降低Alta青少年犯罪率，电视观众应该要求电视节目制作者减少黄金时段暴力镜头的播出数量。
************************************************************
提纲：
1．首先，电视的暴力节目的增加跟青少年犯罪没有必然的联系。犯罪率的增加跟地区环境，还有自己本身的心理因素有关。（因果关系）
2．对于全国的调查，作者提供是在家中的暴力行为，那么很有可能是家长的原因，家庭暴力，家长的虐待。
3．结论说减少黄金时段的暴力节目播放时间就能减少青少年的犯罪率是基于observer的一次调查。然而，这次调查的样本总量和代表性都没有明确给出，因此不能证明青少年一定会在黄金时段看电视。如果是这样，措施就没有用了。
**************************************************************
正文：
Prior to choosing to reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time for the purpose of decreasing the rate of teenage crime in Alta, I find that the evidence presented in this argument requires an in-depth scrutiny from several aspects. In my opinion, the author seems to have unduly relied on the two survey invoked in this argument and thus draw a conclusion that is fundamentally flawed.

To begin with, the threshold problem with this argument is its establishment of a causal relationship between watching TV and the increasing rate of teenager delinquency in Alta. In fact, as we know, the increase in teenage crime associates with many factors, say, the condition of the region the teenagers live or even their psychological factors. For that matter, we have sufficient to assume that since the 1950's Alta had been undergoing the hardship of economy and thus the condition of family are quite poor, which may lead the teenagers to commit crimes. Moreover, it is also entirely possible that the teenagers who commit crimes have severe psychological disease, which forced them to do bad deeds. Accordingly, since the author fails to respond to these concerns, the assumption that the increase in teenage crime is due to the violent shows on TV cannot convince me at all.

In a not dissimilar manner, the author also illogically presumes that it must be the violent shows on TV that are attributable to affect the young children's violent behavior merely relying on the national survey, which, however, may not be the case. As mentioned in this argument, the survey is confined with in the sphere of family. In that case, there is good chance that young children's parents should be blamed because they may often be drunk or abuse their young children, which would be highly possible to be imitated by their children. If true, this would inevitably undermine the authenticity and credibility of this survey.

Before coming to finish my analysis, we might as well turn our focus to the author's conclusion that based on the survey held by the Observer. Nevertheless, after a close examination, I find there is nowhere more ridiculous than this conclusion. For one thing, as for the survey, the author fails to inform us about the total number of the sample and whether it is representative or not. For another thing, even assuming that the survey is precise to reflect the reality, we nevertheless do not assure that teenagers would watch TV merely in prime time. It is quite possible that teenagers choose to watch TV at noon or they may even resort to the other channels such as books or VCDs. Consequently, without taking into consideration these possibilities, the author's conclusion would be premature at best.

To sum up, the argument is weakened by a myriad of unwarranted assumptions as it stands. To better evaluate it, I would need to know detailed information about these two surveys. Moreover, the author should also afford clear evidence to show that violent shows do contribute to the increasing crimes that committed by teenagers; otherwise, the argument would be unfounded.

Forge ahead, never retreat!