第九页
可能关注的是专才和通才的和交流，传递，政策，信息或者技术的关系。这些所有方法都是有效的，只要你用相关的理由和例子来支持你的立场
在你阐述你的立场之前，选一些情况来重读观点、来解释这个，考虑下面的问题
1）在专才和通才之间的主要差别？每一个的重点是什么
2）在不同的职业和情况中，这些差异会有吗？会有一些专才，比如说，那些需要有一个广阔的知识和通才的能力来表现你的工作。
3）通才和专才是怎样在你的领域里起作用
4）你认为专才和通才社会有何作用？专才过估在很多情况下而不是在其他情况下？
5）社会真的要有超过需求量的通才？如果是这样，他们会提供什么需要
现在你可以组织你的想法在两组中：
1）理由和例子来支持观点
2）理由和例子来支持任何一方反方的观点
如果你发现一个更能说服的清晰的理由，想发展一个argue从那个观点。你建立argue，在脑中想其他的观点，你会反对的观点
如果两个组都有强制的观点，考虑发展一个支持的观点，不是陈述观点，但是一个更限制性的和更复杂的观点。然后，你可以用理由和例子来支持你公正你的立场的两个方面
该文章和该文章者的评论
6分作文
The notion that protective gear reduces the injuries suffered in accidentsseems at first glance to be an
obvious conclusion. After all, it is the intent of these products toeither provent accidents from occuring in the first place or to reduce theinjuries suffered by the wearer should an accident occur. However, the
conclusion that investing in high quality protective gear greatly reducesthe risk of being severely injured in an accident may mask other (andpotentially more significant) causes of injuries and may inspire people to overinvest financially and psychologically in protective gear.
First of all, as mentioned in the argument, there are two distinct kindsof gear - preventative gear (such as light reflecting material) and protectivegear (such as helmets). Preventative gear is intended to warn
others, presumably for the most part motorists, of the presence of theroller skater. It works only if the
"other" is aresponsible and caring individual who will afford the skater the necessaryspace and attention.
Protective gear is intended to reduce the effect of any accident, whetherit is caused by an other, the skater or some force of nature. Protective geardoes little, if anything, to prevent accidents but is presumed to reduce theinjuries that occur in an accident. The statistics on injuries suffered byskaters would be more interesting if the skaters were grouped into thosewearing no gear at all, those wearing protective gear only,those wearingpreventative gear only and those wearing both. These statistics could provideskaters with a clearer understanding of which kinds of gear are morebeneficial.
The argument above is weakened by the fact that it does not take into accountthe inherent differences between skaters who wear gear and those who do not. Ifis at least likely that those who wear gear may be generally more responsibleand/or safety conscious individuals. The skaters who wear gear may be less likelyto cause accidents through careless or dangerous behavior. It may, in fact, betheir natural caution and repsonsibility that keeps them out of the emergencyroom rather than the gear itself. Also, the statistic above is based entirelyon those who are skating in streets and parking lots which are relativelydangerous places to skate in the first place. People who are generally moresafety conscious (and therefore more likely to wear gear) may choose to skatein safer areas such as parks or back yards.
The statistic also goes not differentiate between severity of injuries.The conclusion that safety gear
prevents severe injuries suggests that it is presumed that people come tothe emergency room only with
severe injuries. This is certainly not the case. Also, given that skatingis a recreational activity that may be primarily engaged in during evenings andweekends (when doctors' offices are closed), skater with less severe injuriesmay be especially likely to come to the emergency room for treatment.
Finally, there is absolutely no evidence provided that high quality (andpresumably more expensive) gear is any more beneficial than other kinds ofgear. For example, a simple white t-shirt may provide the same preventativebenefit as a higher quality, more expensive, shirt designed only for skating.Before skaters are encouraged to invest heavily in gear, a more completeunderstanding of the benefit provided by individual pieces of gear would behelpful.
The argument for safety gear based on emergency room statistics could provideimportant information and potentially saves lives. Before conclusions about theamount and kinds of investments that should be made in gear are reached,however, a more complete understanding of the benefits are needed. After all, afalse confidence in ineffective gear could be just as dangerous as no gear atall. | 
GO
楼主: domudomu
发表于 2009-11-18 20:13:39
0
转发
