[a习作temp] argument71 [0710g直接冲刺小组] 欢迎拍，互拍！ [复制链接]

thetiger
UID：2288760

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 230
注册时间: 2007-1-1
精华: 0
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-7-20 15:11:16 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
WORDS: 442 TIME: 00:30:00 DATE: 2007-7-20 15:16:44
The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to take into account all the elements necessary to evaluate the situation which make the argument unsound.I will be specific on the fallacies of this argument below.
To begin with, the author asserts that new method can save up to 40 percent electricity than the old method,but fails to provide enough information on this precondition.The new technology save more electricity especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high,but there is no information when the proportion of copper in the ore is low.Without such information,it is totally possible that new technology will cost even more electricity than the old technology when the proportion of copper is low.We cannot rely on the vague assertion of this argument to belive that the new technology is better.
What's more,the author did not give enough information on average proportion of copper in the ore,such information is very important in determining which method to use.If it is most of the case that the proportion of copper is low in the ore,then the new technology cannot be so effective,maybe it even cost more electricity than the old one.In this circumstance,we should not bother to change method.Also,there is no evidence that the old technology is not doing good.Without such information,it is quite probable that the old technology is costing fairly little electricity.So there is not need to change for the new one.
As to the conclusion of this argument,we can not get the conclusion that the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry is to decline significantly from the argument.Firstly,as I mentioned above,there is no evidence that the new technology can save electricity.Secondly,even if the new technology can save electricity,there is no evidence that people are going to use this technology.It is possible that it is too expensive to buy the equipment the people cannot afford to use the new technology.
Also it is probable that the new technology need high-quality employees that few factories are willing to accept this new method because they donot have such employees.If so,we can not expect the dramatic drop in the cost of electricity in copper-extraction industry.
To sum up, the argument merely scratches the surface of what must be said.To make this argument more convincing,the author should have to provide more persuasive supports on the problems I mentioned above.Such information may include the information on the average proportion of copper in ore and more information of the new technology.Also the author should provide people's willing to use the new technology before he get the conclusion that the cost of electricity used in copper-extraction industry are likely to drop.

回应
0

使用道具举报

坏熊宝宝
UID：2217995

高级会员

Rank: 5 Rank: 5

声望: 0
寄托币: 2978
注册时间: 2006-5-28
精华: 0
帖子: 26

沙发

发表于 2007-7-21 21:47:19 |只看该作者

The argument presented above is relatively sound, however, the author fails to take into account all the elements necessary to evaluate the situation which make the argument unsound.I will be specific on the fallacies of this argument below.这里我觉得这样写不是太好，加上这些词汇不会觉得好一些呢 At the first glance, this argument presents above is relative sound. however， after a close scrutiny, I find...
To begin with, the author asserts that new method can save up to 40 percent electricity than the old method(one)这样感觉会不会好一些呢,but the author fails to provide enough information on this precondition.The new technology save more electricity especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high,but there is no information when the proportion of copper in the ore is low这里什么意思？.Without such information,it is totally possible that new technology will cost even more electricity than the old technology when the proportion of copper is low.We cannot rely on the vague assertion of this argument to belive that the new technology is better.这段我觉得不如加上题目的前提，铜矿都是和别的矿混合的题目也没说有纯铜矿，而且题目里提到了新技术节是espeically with high purity of copper ore 那么也许新技术因为没有比较纯的铜矿，节电的效果不佳
What's more,the author did not give enough information on average proportion of copper in the ore,such information is very important in determining which method to use.If it is most of the case that the proportion of copper is low in the ore,then the new technology cannot be so effective,maybe it even cost more electricity than the old one.In this circumstance,we should not bother to change method.Also,there is no evidence that the old technology is not doing good.Without such information,it is quite probable that the old technology is costing fairly little electricity.So there is not need to change for the new one.这段可以并到前一段写，这里可以写写新旧技术的一些猜测对比比如说新技术可能是节电，但对黄精有很大的污染，或者新技术太花钱之类的
As to the conclusion of this argument,we can not get the conclusion that the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry is to decline significantly from the argument.Firstly,as I mentioned above,there is no evidence that the new technology can save electricity.Secondly,even if the new technology can save electricity,there is no evidence that people are going to use this technology.It is possible that it is too expensive to buy the equipment the people cannot afford to use the new technology.这里有点重复前面的感觉，
Also it is probable that the new technology need high-quality employees that few factories are willing to accept this new method because they donot have such employees.If so,we can not expect the dramatic drop in the cost of electricity in copper-extraction industry.这个好
To sum up, the argument merely scratches the surface of what must be said.To make this argument more convincing,the author should have to provide more persuasive supports on the problems I mentioned above.Such information may include the information on the average proportion of copper in ore and more information of the new technology.Also the author should provide people's willing to use the new technology before he get the conclusion that the cost of electricity used in copper-extraction industry are likely to drop.
这道题其实我觉得有点难写的因为给的攻击点不是很多不过我觉得也不要老死扣新老技术节电
可以更多的写一些新技术可能产生的弊端你的第5段这样的比较我觉得蛮好的，可以多写一点

使用道具举报