[a习作temp] argument141 欢迎拍砖，留链互拍 [复制链接]

bryanshaw
UID: 2239455

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 477
注册时间: 2006-8-8
精华: 1
帖子: 16

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2008-2-21 13:25:08 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

题目：ARGUMENT141 - The following appeared in a newsletter distributed at a recent political rally.

"Over the past year, the Consolidated Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over one million square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in pollution and environmental disaster, since West Fredonia is home to several endangered animal species. But such disaster can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC's copper until the company abandons its mining plans."
字数：443 用时：00:28:00 日期：2008-2-21下午 01:20:36

In this argument the author suggests people refuse to buy products made with CCC's copper so the company will abandons its mining in West Fredonia. However, the author does not prove that this method is proper because it suffers several serious logic flaws.

In the beginning, the arguer assumes that the CCC will certainly bring pollution and environment disaster to West Fredonia without any research on the company. However, if the company has a set of highly strict regulations which can ensure the lowest damage to environment, or no effects on the species, the arguer has no reason to make such an assumption. And moreover, the area mined by CCC may be not exactly the home of these dying species, although they are both in West Fredonia, without ruling out such possibilities, it seems too hastily to blame to CCC.

In addition, the author fails to take account the fact that there exist other factors which will be harmful to the environment as well as the animal species besides copper mining. For example, the air pollution by cars, the water pollution by chemical factories, or land missing by city rebuilding will all cause some animal species to die out. The West Fredonia may have been polluted for several years and the author should find out what are the mainly reasons of the pollution. Thus, the author's assumption that CCC is the killer of animals comes to a flaw again.

Third, the author gives an absurd suggestion in the end of the argument which says that people will make CCC abandon its mining if they refuse to purchase its products. Common sense tells that when products are on sale, the manufacture has been finished already, so even not a single product is sale, the lands are still spoiled and maybe the disaster to some animal species can not be prevented already. What's more, although people in West Fredonia do not buy CCC's products, the company can find other market in the nation wide and they will not stop mining. The last, even if this refusing will stop the CCC's further mining in West Fredonia, the author ignores the requirement of people's daily life. Provided that what CCC produces are indisputably important instruments for everyday life, one can not imagine what if the refusing is taken. So, the author does not consider this problem thoroughly enough.

In sum, the author fails to substantiate his conclusion convincing because his assumption is unfounded and even absurd. What he needs is to do more research on the tech of CCC and the market of CCC's products in the nation wide. Some more logic method will be found out then.

Once i had a dream

回应
0

使用道具举报

tengyan1029
UID: 2450392

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 131
注册时间: 2008-1-23
精华: 0
帖子: 1

沙发

发表于 2008-2-21 14:07:40 |只看该作者

来拍！

楼主的字太小了的说，建议改改~~

题目：ARGUMENT141 - The following appeared in a newsletter distributed at a recent political rally.

"Over the past year, the Consolidated Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over one million square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in pollution and environmental disaster, since West Fredonia is home to several endangered animal species. But such disaster can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC's copper until the company abandons its mining plans."
字数：443 用时：00:28:00 日期：2008-2-21下午 01:20:36

In this argument the author suggests people refuse to buy products made with CCC's copper so the company will abandons its mining in West Fredonia. However, the author does not (这里添加successfully好点，因为他是证明了的，只是因为他的逻辑谬误，导致不能成功得到结论)prove that this method is proper because it suffers several serious logic flaws.

In the beginning, the arguer assumes that the CCC will certainly bring pollution and environment disaster to West Fredonia without any research on the company. However, if the company has a set of highly strict regulations which can ensure the lowest damage to environment, or no （adverse）effects on the species, the arguer has no reason to make such an assumption. And （and去掉吧，有点多余）moreover, the area mined by CCC may be not exactly the home of these dying species, although they are both in West Fredonia, without ruling out such possibilities, it seems too hastily （用形容词hasty）to blame to(后面这个to去掉，不过blame好像还是用得不太好的说) CCC.

In addition, the author fails to take account （添加of，完整短语应该是take account of 吧）the fact that there exist other factors which will be harmful to the environment as well as the animal species besides copper mining. For example, the air pollution by cars, the water pollution by chemical factories, or land missing by city rebuilding will all cause some animal species to die out. The West Fredonia may have been polluted for several years and the author should find out what are the mainly（还是要用形容词，推荐一个词primary） reasons of the pollution. Thus, the author's assumption that CCC is the killer of animals comes to a flaw again.

Third, the author gives an absurd suggestion in the end of the argument which says that people will make CCC abandon its mining if they refuse to purchase its products. Common sense tells that when products are on sale, the manufacture has been finished already, so even not a single product is sale, the lands are still spoiled and maybe the disaster to some animal species can not be prevented already. What's more, although people in West Fredonia do not buy CCC's products, the company can find other market in the nation wide and they will not stop mining. （这句不太明白，WF本来就是一个国家了呀）The last, even if this refusing will stop the CCC's further mining in West Fredonia, the author ignores the requirement of people's daily life. Provided that what CCC produces are indisputably important instruments for everyday life, one can not imagine what (添will happen) if the refusing is taken. So, (不要用so吧，therefore, consequently都可以换~)the author does not consider this problem thoroughly enough.

In sum, the author fails to substantiate his conclusion convincing （? convincing去掉吧）because his assumption is unfounded and even absurd. What he needs is to do more research on the tech of CCC and the market of CCC's products in the nation wide. Some more logic method will be found out then.（最后一句显得多余，不如干脆去掉它~~）

总的结构很清晰，论述的展开也比较有力~~感觉不错！
就是楼主注意一些用词的小问题，
不过楼主写得好快哦，28分钟写了这么多！！厉害，我还不能限时写。。。
修改不当还请多多指教啦~欢迎回拍我的argumeng65

http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/thread-803490-1-3.html

[ 本帖最后由 tengyan1029 于 2008-2-21 14:09 编辑 ]

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报