- 最后登录
- 2011-12-24
- 在线时间
- 102 小时
- 寄托币
- 485
- 声望
- 5
- 注册时间
- 2009-12-9
- 阅读权限
- 20
- 帖子
- 5
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 485
- UID
- 2736288
 
- 声望
- 5
- 寄托币
- 485
- 注册时间
- 2009-12-9
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 5
|
发表于 2009-12-17 21:42:10
|显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 bigeyes_1314 于 2009-12-17 22:48 编辑
12. 17
题目:ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"
字数:418
用时:00:45:00
日期:2009/12/17 21:26:33
The author alleges that scientific research and development needs government few or any restrictions. In my point of view, I agree that government place some restrictions on scientific research and development, but government should consider the extent of the restrictions on it.
On one hand, scientific research and development needs government's restrictions and support. Without government's support, some scientific research cannot develop well. The first guarantee to develop some scientific research is from government's support. Scientific research needs research funding from government even from the nation to promote its development. Take the spaceship research which costs a large amount of money for instance, if researchers don't get the funding and scientific assistance from government, it is perhaps impossible for any movements in the space research.
On the other hand, government should place some restrictions on scientific research and development. Scientific research and development brings about lots of merits to the society. For example, the invention of computers makes the whole world become smaller and makes it possible for people to know more about the world. Meanwhile, using computers also brings some problems. Some kids and young people are so obsessed in some computer games that they give up their study. To avoid such kinds of problems to happy again, it is essential for government to restrict some scientific research to make sure the research place a favorable influence on the society.
Although it is essential to place some restrictions on scientific research,
few restrictions on research is better?
From what I have seen, I do not think it is good to place few restrictions on scientific research. There is a new movie which showed this. A boy was crazy about science and he kept researching a machine which can turn water into different kinds of food according to the different scientific order and menu.
After lots of failures, he succeeded and invented the food machine. The government of the city where this boys lived encouraged his research and thought his research would bring the profits for the city. However, because of the overworking the machine became a disaster for the city even the world. The food varied so large that it can destory the world. If the government placed some restrictions instead of nothing, maybe this situation will not happy in the movie.
From what has been discussed above, we may safely draw the conclusion that government should encourage scientific research and provide essential support for it. At the same time, scientific research and government also needs government's restrictions.
题目:ARGUMENT210 - The following is a letter to the editor of a news magazine.
"Clearly, the successful use of robots on missions to explore outer space in the past 20 years demonstrates that robots could be increasingly used to perform factory work more effectively, efficiently, and profitably than human factory workers. The use of robots in factories would offer several advantages. First, robots never get sick, so absenteeism would be reduced. Second, robots do not make mistakes, so factories would increase their output. Finally, the use of robots would also improve the morale of factory workers, since factory work can be so boring that many workers would be glad to shift to more interesting kinds of tasks."
字数:253
用时:00:30:00
日期:2009/12/17 21:26:33
The arguer concludes that using robots to perform factory work will be more effectively, efficiently and profitably. To justify the conclusion the arguer cites the fact that robots are used to explore outer space in the past 20 years. The conclusion seems like kind of logical, however, it is based on several problematic respects.
First, the argument depends on the assumption that the kinds of tasks robots perform in the outer space are similar to the ones in the factory. Perhaps robots can adapt to the space environmrnt so they can work effectively. Or maybe robots have less work to do in the outer space than in the factory. So it is not persuasive to get the conclusion that robots will work effectively.
As for the author's claim that the use of robots will reduce the absenteeism. Although robots will not get sick, sometimes they will break down or have some problems in their own machine parts. Without take an account for this likelihood, the author cannot assume that the use of robots will reduce absenteeism.
Then the author claims that robots do not make mistakes and would increase the factory's output. The author did not provide sufficient evidence to show that robots never make mistakes or the workers has lower output.
Another flaw the author claims is that using robots will improve the morale of the worker while the author fails to provide assurances that if the worker shift to another kind of task, they will be happy and work more effectively.
In sum, the author relies on a series of weak analogy and get the problematic conclusions. To strength the argument, the author should provide more evidence to assure that the use of robots in factory work effectively, efficiently. |
|