[a习作temp] argument137 同主题改后稿 [复制链接]

tangjihede
UID：2107695

高级会员

Rank: 5 Rank: 5

声望: 1
寄托币: 2247
注册时间: 2005-6-9
精华: 2
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-8-4 15:57:02 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Argument137
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户共用时间：30分2秒 431 words
从2005年7月4日15时7分到2005年7月4日15时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.
'At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River.'
------正文------
In this argument, the arguer tries to convince us that Manson City council should increase its budget to improve the public lands along the Mason River, by appealing to a survey and several situations that the arguer believes proving the necessity to do so. A close scrutiny, however, will reveal that this argument suffers from several serious flaws.

To begin with, the validity of the survey is open to doubt. No detailed information about this survey is offered. We may ask, therefore, a series of questions such as who conducted the survey? Is the conductor neutral to this issue? Was the pool large enough to present the real public opinion? Did the survey follow scientific methods such as random sample? Without ruling out these doubts, the arguer cannot safely base the argument on it.

Even granted this survey is reliable, the result of the survey—that the residents rank water sports as a favorite form of recreation--does not necessarily follow that they prefer to have these water sports in a river. It is highly possible that they are only willing to go to a water park to have them, or even go to a lake, rather than a river. We cannot find any evidence in the argument to rule out this possibility either.

Moreover, even granted the residents would like to have water sports in a river, it is not necessarily the case that they will choose the Manson River. There might be many reasons besides the pollution that account for why they have not gone to the Manson River for long. For example, maybe the river is too narrow to have sports, or maybe the water follow is too rapid. It is even possible there are dangerous animals living in this river. If this is the case, then the recreational use of the river will also not increase.

Besides, even if it is only because of the pollution that hold back people from having fun in the Mason River, the mere fact the relative agency has announced plans to clean up the river cannot guarantee that the pollution problem will surely be solved. Maybe that agency will fail to do this job; or even they will finish the job, it is still possible that the water quality is far from being satisfied by residents.

In a word, the arguer fails to offer a sound argument to support the conclusion. To strengthen it, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to prove that the residents will choose the Mason River to have water sports, and that the pollution problem will be completely solved.

"I will act," says Don Quixote, "as if the world were what I would have it to be, as if the ideal were real..."

回应
0

使用道具举报

MIMOSARL
UID：2112846

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1555
注册时间: 2005-7-1
精华: 0
帖子: 11

沙发

发表于 2005-8-6 15:53:31 |只看该作者

In this argument, the arguer tries to convince us that Manson City council should increase its budget to improve the public lands along the Mason River, by appealing to a survey and several situations that the arguer believes proving the necessity to do so. A close scrutiny, however, will reveal that this argument suffers from several serious flaws.

To begin with, the validity of the survey is open to doubt. No detailed information about this survey is offered. We may ask, therefore, a series of questions such as who conducted the survey? Is the conductor neutral to this issue? Was the pool large enough to present the real public opinion? Did the survey follow scientific methods such as random sample? Without ruling out these doubts, the arguer cannot safely base the argument on it

Even granted this survey is reliable, the result of the survey—that the residents rank water sports as a favorite form of recreation--does not necessarily follow that they prefer to have these water sports in a river. It is highly possible that they are only willing to go to a water park to have them, or even go to a lake, rather than a river. We cannot find any evidence in the argument to rule out this possibility either.（这个和上一段其实可以并在一起的 SUVERY 和 IGNORE COMPLAINE）

Moreover, even granted the residents would like to have water sports in a river, it is not necessarily the case that they will choose the Manson River. There might be many reasons besides the pollution that account for why they have not gone to the Manson River for long. For example, maybe the river is too narrow to have sports, or maybe the water follow is too rapid. It is even possible there are dangerous animals living in this river. If this is the case, then the recreational use of the river will also not increase.

Besides, even if it is only because of the pollution that hold back people from having fun in the Mason River, the mere fact the relative agency has announced plans to clean up the river cannot guarantee that the pollution problem will surely be solved. Maybe that agency will fail to do this job; or even they will finish the job, it is still possible that the water quality is far from being satisfied by residents.

In a word, the arguer fails to offer a sound argument to support the conclusion. To strengthen it, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to prove that the residents will choose the Mason River to have water sports, and that the pollution problem will be completely solved.
.逻辑很清楚，挺好。我觉得你的EVEN GRANTED, EVEN IF 好像很多，不知道是不是好有没有替代的词了？（我一直觉得点多的话，SURVEY的问题可以稍微攻击一下，是否可以考虑加上 INCREASE BUDGET?那个点）
现在的工作应该固定模板，增加攻击力度的展开了

使用道具举报