【big fish】2月22日（issue40+argument5)-by Jenius

jenius4869UID: 2659821

第一次作业，磨了好久，终于写完了，有点没摸到门路，改的人多包涵啦！意见尽管提，到这里来就是来进步的！BIG FISH小组加油↖(^ω^)↗




No.40 : scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their works makes a contribution to the large society. It is more important that they pursue their individual interets , however unusual or idiosyncratic those intersts may seem.

I agree with the speaker insofar as that individual interests for the unknown or mysterious scientific fields is the only and fundamental drive which motivates the scholars and researchers reach their goals and chase their dream. So it is important to let the scholars and researchers follow their own interest. However, those unfettered interests, some of which may seem to be unusual or idiosyncratic, should be assessed by some standards and controlled under apt regulation for the best advancement of large society.

When it comes to talking about the great influence of achievement of technology has on the development of our society, we could almost say the advantages of it outweigh the damages it brings about. One only need observe the way of our daily life are going about. With the help of refrigeratory, we can keep the food fresh and eat it in a longer time. By using the internet, it is possible for us to talk or even see the friends much far away from us. I believe, when we refer to history, numerous inventions serve as to make our life more convenient and easier. Such accomplishments are all definitely attribute to the diligent and intellect of our scholars and researchers. Without the unfettered imaginative and independent thinking of each individual or groups, everything that seems to be impossible in the past finally came into reality. There is no doubt that we can never reach the achievement right now if the scientists think just like others, for example, claiming that sending a person to the sky is such an crazy idea in the eyes of most people lived in the age of Wright brothers lived. Therefore, sometimes it should be encouraged that every scholar and researcher pursue their individual interests, no matter how usual it may be.

However, though most of the scientific inventions and advancement achieved by scholars and researchers benefit a lot to our large community, it is also essential to consider the damage caused by technology. Did you remember the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945? The enormous amount of energy in terms of air pressure and heat devastated the houses and buildings of the two cities, including people. In addition, it also generated a significant amount of radiation of Gamma ray and neutrons that subsequently caused lasting human injuries. The atomic energy, which could also be used to generate electricity can be an catastrophe to human beings if we do not think about the consequence it can bring about. Imaginative thinking and idiosyncratic interests, for the most of the time, do have a positive effect on our society, yet it is importance to keep in mind that the ultimate purpose of every technological development must be make a good contribution to the large society rather than barely follow one's own interest.

It is always said that technology is a double-edged sword. While the scholars and researches are exploring the uncertain future of a research, it is the commitment and responsibility of the people, including normal citizen, profound scientists, philosophers, over the world to get together to protect our world from being destroyed and our society being tumbled. For instance, the cloning, a popular term in science field even in our daily life. Since the scientists have successfully cloned a sheep, which sends academics and the public into a panic at the prospect that human might be next. And what is understandable is that there are many researchers who have great passion to do some researches towards this direction since it spur the curiosity of human beings. Yet much of the ethical opposition holds the opinion that it might threaten human society and dignity. Such a thing is still unsolvable up until now. But all of us should be happy to see that this kind of thing does not progress only by the will of those scholars who are extraordinarily interested in it. The restriction will certainly make a better condition for scientific development.

To sum up, it is the scholars' and researchers' rights that to pursue their individual interests, yet just as regulation is necessary to the preservation and development of civil and political liberty, it is also essential to limit the free thinking and doing of one's own interest to protect the whole peaceful society. And judging from the perspective whether a task done by researchers can make a contribution to society is a advisable standard.



5.The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.

"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of
arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next
twenty years, pharmaceutical(制药的) companies that produce drugs for the
treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe
that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the
best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable
pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years,
and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the
drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable
pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new
drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by
seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of
arthritis."

In this newspaper, the author predicts that the PP(Perkins Pharmaceuticals) will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company in ten years for the reason that the Xylan, which produced by this company for the patients who suffer from arthritis, will replace the Xenon to become the best-selling drug. To support this projection, the author claims (1) the number of people with some form of arthritis in our country will dramatically increase from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years. (2)The patent on Xenon,which is the best-selling drug produced by BP right now (Becton Pharmaceuticals)will expires in three years. (3）The clinical studies show that sever out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis preferred Xylan over Xenon. Though the author's prediction sounds reasonable, I find several logical flaws which render it unconvincing.

To begin with, based on the author's opinion, the remarkably growing number of people who may have some problems with arthritis in next twenty years will definitely lead to the huge profit in pharmaceutical companies. But such consequence is not a tendency which is meant to happen in the following ten years. Firstly, even if this evidence provided by the author is a fact, it is reluctant to say that just in ten years, the number will certainly increase. As we know, since the prediction depends on a period of twenty years, let us suppose the increasing rate is a constant, then usually the last ten years the number seems to be increased much more than first ten years. Therefore, it is unwarranted to judge that the people suffering from arthritis will increase a lot in next ten years. Moreover, even if the number of people suffering from arthritis increases significantly, the author fails to provide evidence to conclude that the pharmaceutical companied are going to get much profit. Therefore, after going through the author's assertion carefully, we will find the fact that there is no reason to say the pharmaceutical company will gain much profit because of the increasing number of people who may get arthritis.

Secondly, when it comes to talking about the competition between pharmaceutical companies, the author also assumes unfairly that other drugs will replace Xenon whose patent will be overdue in the next three years for other companies will be able to make a cheaper version of Xenon. However, the author overlooks other possibilities, especially the action will be taken by BP, which may result in a totally different situation. Perhaps the patients are continuing to buy Xenon despite its higher price since they have too much trust in this brand to try another one. Or perhaps, the price of Xenon will decrease since the administrators of BP realize it a better way to attract consumers since they do not possess the protection of their patent. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author's assertion that the cheaper drug will take place of Xenon cannot be taken seriously.

Finally, the author also mentions the clinical studies which illuminate the Xylan is more appealed to arthritic patients and it is more likely the company named PP which produced this drug will become the most profitable pharmaceutical company in next ten years. Firstly, I do not think the result of the clinical studies is credible for it fails to make a larger sample of people who suffering from variable extent problem of arthritis. Only relied on a sample of ten persons, the author cannot conclude anything.

To sum up, the author's assertion is unpersuasive for the several aspects I discussed above. To better bolster the conclusion, the author should provide more detailed analyses and circumstance of the drug market of arthritic patients. Moreover, the author also should substantiate the increasing scale of people who may suffer from arthritis in following ten years and this tendency could lead to the pharmaceutical companies gain profit to a large extent. Besides these efforts, I maintain it is also important to do a more accurate and significant clinical study to support the author's result.

669 words. 疯了。。。。感觉废话是不是太多了，但是不知道怎么拣重点说了，尤其在重复作者观点的时候，不知道怎样才能不累赘。还有将来时态的表达有点死板，就晓得说will，希望能给些建议。狠批，米事。

topranUID: 2310216

No.40 : scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their works makes a contribution to the large society. It is more important that they pursue their individual interets , however unusual or idiosyncratic those intersts may seem.

I agree with the speaker insofar as that individual interests for the unknown or mysterious scientific fields is the only and fundamental drive which motivates the scholars and researchers reach their goals and chase their dream. So it is important to let the scholars and researchers follow their own interest. However, those unfettered interests, some of which may seem to be unusual or idiosyncratic, should be assessed by some standards and controlled under apt regulation for the best advancement of large society.

When it comes to talking (talk) about the great influence of achievement of technology has on the development of our society(how about to change this sectence to:when talk about the great influence of technology to out society), we could almost say the advantages of it outweigh the damages it brings about. One only need( to) observe the way of our daily life are going about. With the help of refrigeratory, we can keep the food fresh and eat it in a longer time. By using the internet, it is possible for us to talk or even see the friends much far away from us. I believe, when we refer to history, numerous inventions serve as to make our life more convenient and easier. Such accomplishments are all definitely attribute to the diligent and intellect of our scholars and researchers. Without the unfettered imaginative (imagination) and independent thinking of each individual or groups, everything that seems to be impossible in the past finally came into reality. (I am quite confused with this sentense )There is no doubt that we can never reach the achievement right now if the scientists think just like others, for example, claiming(there is definitely some grammar mistake in this word , if you want to keep it , please do consider it carefully ) that sending a person to the sky is such an crazy idea in the eyes of most people lived in the age of Wright brothers lived(but …). Therefore, sometimes it should be encouraged that every scholar and researcher pursue their individual interests, no matter how usual(unusual?) it may be.

However, though most of the scientific inventions and advancement achieved by scholars and researchers benefit a lot to our large community, it is also essential to consider the damage caused by technology. Did (do) you remember the two atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945? The enormous amount of energy in terms of air pressure and heat devastated the houses and buildings of the two cities, including people (I think you can try to use the structure like : not only houses and buildinga , but also innocent people). In addition, it also generated a significant amount of radiation of Gamma ray and neutrons that subsequently caused lasting human injuries. The atomic energy, which could also be used to generate electricity can be an catastrophe to human beings if we do not think about the consequence it can bring about. Imaginative thinking and idiosyncratic interests, for the most of the time, do have a positive effect on our society, yet it is importance to keep in mind that the ultimate purpose of every technological development must be make a good contribution to the large society rather than barely follow one's own interest.

It is always said that technology is a double-edged sword. While the scholars and researches are exploring the uncertain future of a research, it is the commitment and responsibility of the people, including normal citizen, profound scientists, philosophers, over the world to get together to protect our world from being destroyed and our society being tumbled.(good potint!!!) For instance, the cloning, a popular term in science field even in our daily life. Since the scientists have successfully cloned a sheep, which sends academics and the public into a panic at the prospect that human might be next. And what is understandable is that there are many researchers who have great passion to do some researches towards this direction since it spur the curiosity of human beings. Yet much of the ethical opposition holds the opinion that it might threaten human society and dignity. Such a thing is still unsolvable up until now. But all of us should be happy to see that this kind of thing does not progress only by the will of those scholars who are extraordinarily interested in it. The restriction will certainly make a better condition for scientific development.(I really like this paragraph, it is beautiful!!!!)

Good job I really enjoy read it , in order to make you work more prefect in the later day ,I need to be a nitpicker this time :
1, I do not think the beginning of this article is good enough,but the conclusion certainly light up the whole article
2, it seems that paragraph 2 and 3 have some logical weakness and a little beside the point
3, the structure of the sentense is too complicatate which make me confuse a lot .

But I like your work anyway , it my pleasure to read yours .

topranUID: 2310216

5.The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.

"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of
arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next
twenty years, pharmaceutical(制药的) companies that produce drugs for the
treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe
that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the
best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable
pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years,
and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the
drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable
pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new
drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by
seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of
arthritis."

In this newspaper, the author predicts that the PP(Perkins Pharmaceuticals) will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company in ten years for the reason that the Xylan, which produced by this company for the patients who suffer from arthritis, will replace the Xenon to become the best-selling drug. To support this projection, the author claims (1) the number of people with some form of arthritis in our country will dramatically increase from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years. (2)The patent on Xenon,which is the best-selling drug produced by BP right now (Becton Pharmaceuticals)will expires in three years. (3）The clinical studies show that sever out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis preferred Xylan over Xenon. Though the author's prediction sounds reasonable, I find several logical flaws which render it (it-> this artical)unconvincing.

To begin with, based on the author's opinion, the remarkably growing number of people who may have some problems with arthritis in next twenty years will definitely lead to the huge profit in pharmaceutical companies. But such consequence is not a tendency which is meant to happen in the following ten years. Firstly, even if this evidence provided by the author is a fact, it is reluctant to say that just in ten years, the number will certainly increase. As we know, since the prediction depends on a period of twenty years, let us suppose the increasing rate is a constant, then usually the last ten years the number seems to be increased much more than first ten years. Therefore, it is unwarranted to judge that the people suffering from arthritis will increase a lot in next ten years. (smart , it want to use this opint too , but I do not know how to make myself clear , you did it , it’s impressive )Moreover, even if the number of people suffering from arthritis increases significantly, the author fails to provide evidence to conclude that the pharmaceutical companied are going to get much profit. Therefore, after going through the author's assertion carefully, we will find the fact that there is no reason to say the pharmaceutical company will gain much profit because of the increasing number of people who may get arthritis.

Secondly, when it comes to talking about the competition between pharmaceutical companies, the author also assumes unfairly that other drugs will replace Xenon whose patent will be overdue in the next three years for (as?) other companies will be able to make a cheaper version of Xenon. However, the author overlooks other possibilities, especially the action will be taken by BP, which may result in a totally different situation. Perhaps the patients are continuing to buy Xenon despite its higher price since they have too much trust in this brand to try another one. Or perhaps, the price of Xenon will decrease since the administrators of BP realize it a better way to attract consumers since they do not possess the protection of their patent. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author's assertion that the cheaper drug will take place of Xenon cannot be taken seriously.

Finally, the author also mentions the clinical studies which illuminate the Xylan is more appealed to arthritic patients and it is more likely the company named PP which produced this drug will become the most profitable pharmaceutical company in next ten years. Firstly, I do not think the result of the clinical studies is credible for it fails to make a larger sample of people who suffering from variable extent problem of arthritis. Only relied on a sample of ten persons, the author cannot conclude anything.

To sum up, the author's assertion is unpersuasive for the several aspects I discussed above. To better bolster the conclusion, the author should provide more detailed analyses and circumstance of the drug market of arthritic patients. Moreover, the author also should substantiate the increasing scale of people who may suffer from arthritis in following ten years and this tendency could lead to the pharmaceutical companies gain profit to a large extent. Besides these efforts, I maintain it is also important to do a more accurate and significant clinical study to support the author's result.(good conclusion)

This argument is really good ,did you do this in 30 minutes ? I think you can get high mark if you can preform like this during the exam
Good job!!