[a习作temp] argument114 请多指教 [复制链接]

Gardenia-2005
UID：2135942

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1607
注册时间: 2005-9-6
精华: 2
帖子: 9

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2006-2-25 08:01:33 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

114A recently completed study shows that people dwelling in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. A second study shows that elderly residents of buildings with elevators make, on average, twice as many visits to doctors each year as do elderly residents of buildings without elevators. These findings suggest that even a very moderate amount of daily exercise, such as that required to use the stairs leading to and from one's apartment, can increase people's health and longevity. The findings also suggest that new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible.

The auhor's conclusion of the relationship between elevators and health seems, and his suggestion on the construction of new buildings seem to be reasonable on the surface. After all, they are based on two studies about the correlation of health and elevators. But after cardfully scrutinizing the argument, I think that the results of the two reports are at best plausible to make the author's conclusion and recommendation questionable,

First of all, the author fails to mention the specific situations about the objectives such as the number of them, their ages, sexes and health conditions of the objectives studied, a big flaw which is common in the two studies. Withouting doing this, it is highly possible that those people living in the apartment without elevators, are healthier than those who living in the staris-only apartments even before the participating the study. It is also possible that the researcher of the study only choose very limited number of people as objectives to accomplish his study. If so, it is difficult to expand the results based on such a narrow study to the life of every individual.

Seconly, there also other severe fallacies in the two reports. In the first study, the author makes a big mistake that he regards the average long life of people living in the stair-only building a sign of that they are more healthier. But it is likely that some people died at a very early age, while others live a very long time, so that their average age of dying is every large. In addition, there is also a great mistake in the second study, in which the author thinks that higher frequency of visiting doctors means that those people have more diseases than those who living in the building without elevators.However, it is also possible that the more visits only suggest that these people are more concerned about their health than others, but not that they live in a bad health conditions.

Finally, even if the results of the studies are objective, they cannot ensure that the author's conclusion is correct that even a moderate amount of exercise can lead to longevity, they cannot ensure the author's suggestion on the construction of the building is objective, either. It is possible that those people living in the stair-only apartments, besides walking up and down the stair every day, also do a great amount of exercise everyday. It is even possible that they choose to live the apartment of that kind because of they want to do more exercise. Furthermore, the results of the two studies tend to contend that the elevators are to some extent harmful to people's health. So the author's suggestion to construct elevators in the buildings is fundamentally groundless.

In sum, the researchers of two studies make several big flaws that they cannot support the author's conclusion. To strenthen his argument, the author should provide more strong evidence to show the necessary link between the elevators and health. Otherwise, it is difficult for me to believe that his conclusion is scientific.

回应
0

使用道具举报

lorraineye
UID：2157370

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 1
寄托币: 1736
注册时间: 2005-11-13
精华: 1
帖子: 2

沙发

发表于 2006-2-26 22:39:13 |只看该作者

114A recently completed study shows that people dwelling in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. A second study shows that elderly residents of buildings with elevators make, on average, twice as many visits to doctors each year as do elderly residents of buildings without elevators. These findings suggest that even a very moderate amount of daily exercise, such as that required to use the stairs leading to and from one's apartment, can increase people's health and longevity. The findings also suggest that new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible.

The auhor's author’s conclusion of the relationship between elevators and health seems seems what?, and his suggestion on the construction of new buildings seem to be reasonable on the surface. After all, they are based on two studies about the correlation of health and elevators. But after cardfully carefully scrutinizing the argument, I think that the results of the two reports are at best plausible to make the author's conclusion and recommendation questionable,

First of all, the author fails to mention the specific situations about the objectives such as the number of them, their ages, sexes and health conditions of the objectives studied, a big flaw which is common in the two studies. Withouting without doing this, it is highly possible that those people living in the apartment without elevators, are healthier than those who living in the staris-only apartments even before the participating the study. It is also possible that the researcher of the study only choose very limited number of people as objectives to accomplish his study. If so, it is difficult to expand the results based on such a narrow study to the life of every individual. 这段好,把两个study放在一起说,我咋没想到呢,呵呵

Seconly secondly, there are also other severe fallacies in the two reports 这个TS要改. In the first study, the author makes a big mistake that he regards the average long life of people living in the stair-only building a sign of that they are more healthier. But it is likely that some people died at a very early age, while others live a very long time, so that their average age of dying is every large 这点说得不够清楚,再展开一点,举个例子. In addition, there is also a great mistake in the second study, in which the author thinks that higher frequency of visiting doctors means that those people have more diseases than those who living in the building without elevators. However, it is also possible that the more visits only suggest that these people are more concerned about their health than others, but not that they live in a bad health conditions.

Finally, even if the results of the studies are objective, they cannot ensure that the author's conclusion is correct that even a moderate amount of exercise can lead to longevity, they cannot ensure the author's suggestion on the construction of the building is objective, either. It is possible that those people living in the stair-only apartments, besides walking up and down the stair every day, also do a great amount of exercise everyday. It is even possible that they choose to live the apartment of that kind because of they want to do more exercise. Furthermore, the results of the two studies tend to contend that the elevators are to some extent harmful to people's health. So the author's suggestion to construct elevators in the buildings is fundamentally groundless. 感觉这里可以分开两段论述,否则最后一点太弱了

In sum, the researchers of two studies make several big flaws that they cannot support the author's conclusion. To strenthen strengthen his argument, the author should provide more strong evidence to show the necessary link between the elevators and health. Otherwise, it is difficult for me to believe that his conclusion is scientific.

感觉后两段的结构组织不太好,一段里讲两个内容.如果分开两个study和一个结论来驳斥的话应该能更清楚.
另外拼写语法多注意哈,写完了放到word里先改改

使用道具举报