Argument153 G-89-互助社-8.6 同主题写作

tianrushuiUID: 207550

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.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the argument, the arguer reaches the conclusion that television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is .

In the first place, the arguer fails to establish a casual relationship between the increase in violence shown on television and the increase in teenage crime in Alta. It is likely that awful social environment, lack of cherish of parents other than television violence increase that result in the teenage violence increase. On the contrary, there is a possibility that after watching violence in television, teenagers feel unhappy and dislike violence, so they never allow themselves to display any violent behavior. Under this circumstance , it is the television violence that plays as a reversed example to help prevent teenager violence.

In the second place, granted that the increase in violence on TV could result in the increase in teenage crime, there is no guarantee that reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time would necessarily contribute to the aim of lowering the rate of teenage crime of Alta. It is obvious that prime time is not the only period that teenagers may watch television. Even reducing violence shown during prime time, teenagers may watch violence in other period of time. To say the least, even violence totally disappears from television, teenagers would watch violence from other ways, internet, movie, books and etc.

Finally, it is unreasonable to cut down the amount of violence shown during prime time because of the survey of the Observer. Without the information about the total population of the survey and the number of the respondents, the survey is dubious. It is fairly possible that there are 1000 people joined in the survey and only 50 respondents, then only less than 2% of the person agree with reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time. Even if all the parents uphold the reduction, teenagers have the right to decide what they want to watch.

To sum up, in order to better convince readers, the arguer should prove that television violence increase is the determinant of teenager violence increase. Moreover, the arguer should show evidence that reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time actually leads to teenager crime decrease in Alta.

第一篇argument，不知道写得怎么样。关于题目中提到的两个调查有点疑问。第一个说的是national study,是否就是全国性调查，那么关于他的调查范围，调查人数什么的还需要进行攻击吗？第二个是一个调查是关于父母是否赞成的，这个倒是很好去攻击，但总感觉有点怪怪的，引用这个调查是否就是说明了父母赞成在prime time来cut down the amount of violence ，所以要这么做？就是感觉有点怪.

OceanDUID: 2118730

占座

OceanDUID: 2118730

In the argument, the arguer reaches the conclusion that television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.[开头除了写结论，最好提一下证据]

In the first place, the arguer fails to establish a casual relationship between the increase in violence shown on television and the increase in teenage crime in Alta. It is likely that awful social environment[family environment], lack of cherish of parents other than television violence increase that result in the teenage violence increase. On the contrary, there is a possibility that after watching violence in television, teenagers feel unhappy and dislike violence, so they never allow themselves to display any violent behavior. Under this circumstance , it is the television violence that plays as a reversed example to help prevent teenager violence.

In the second place, granted that the increase in violence on TV could result in the increase in teenage crime, there is no guarantee that reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time would necessarily contribute to the aim of lowering the rate of teenage crime of Alta. It is obvious that prime time is not the only period that teenagers may watch television. [这点想的好，我没有想到] Even reducing violence shown during prime time, teenagers may watch violence in other period of time. To say the least, even violence totally disappears from television, teenagers would watch violence from other ways, internet, movie, books and etc.

Finally, it is unreasonable to cut down the amount of violence shown during prime time because of the survey of the Observer. Without the information about the total population of the survey and the number of the respondents, the survey is dubious. It is fairly possible that there are 1000 people joined in the survey and only 50 respondents, then only less than 2% of the person agree with reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time. Even if all the parents uphold the reduction, teenagers have the right to decide what they want to watch. [这句放这里不妥，我知道你想说什么，可是有点唐突，要不然你就再说具体点:)]

To sum up, in order to better convince readers, the arguer should prove that television violence increase is the determinant of teenager violence increase. Moreover, the arguer should show evidence that reducing the amount of violence shown during prime time actually leads to teenager crime decrease in Alta.

[OceanD小结：
第一篇ARGU写成这样很不错了，我能很清楚地把握你的思路，逻辑也很清楚。最值得表扬的是你没有犯太多的语法错误，证明你很用心了。:victory:
下面我总结一下你需要改进的地方
1.有的关键逻辑错误没有找到，比如national studies不能反映Alta的情况。要尽可能多的找，才能得高分
2.句式不是特别有力，要多积累
3.结尾应该把改进方案说具体点。我在书上看的，argu的结尾比issue重要，所以不能太马虎
就这么多吧，大家共勉！:handshake]
帮我看看我的吧，谢谢https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

OceanDUID: 2118730

不好意思，忘了解答你的问题。第一个是全国性的。我个人认为不用攻击人数了，这样的话放到survey第三段中用。我认为应该主要攻击全国性不能代表地方性，可以假设一些地方特点。第二个问题，是表示父母赞成减少暴力节目。个人认为，不是表示非要那么做，只是表示确实存在暴力节目过多的现象，父母提出的解决方案。你的问题倒是提醒了我，我们可以加一段，写出其他解决这个问题的方案，比如普及教育等等，谢谢，真是共勉啊