Argument220[argue偶要保证拿高分，球拍啊]

光辉无敌UID: 2681648

TOPIC: ARGUMENT220 - Thefollowing appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.

"A recent study showedthat in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. Thisresult suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing andbookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore,people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training andexperience in writing for television rather than for print media."
WORDS: 525
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 3/12/2010 10:01:33 PM

The arguer concludes thatpeople who wish to have careers as writers ought to acquire training andexperience in writing for television rather than for print media. Tosubstantiate the conclusion, the arguer cites the study which showed that indescribing a typical day's conversation people make an average of 23 referencesto watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. The arguerasserts that publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline inprofitability according the study. The conclusion may sound reasonable but acareful examination will reveal how groundless it is,.

To begin with, a thresholdproblem with this argument is related with the reliability of the study. Thereis a lack of information about how people were selected to take part in thestudy, how many people participated in the study and how the study was carriedout. It is entirely possible that people selected and responded to the studywere not representative of people in general or questions asked in the studywere suggestive. Furthermore, there is not any data about the way used to judge"reference" to watching television or reading fiction. It is equallypossible that the reference is ambiguous, which means it could be interpretedas reference to watching television or reference to reading book, since fictioncould be adapted to television draft. Without any evidence to prove that peopleparticipated into the study were representative of people and a cleardefinition and distinction of reference, the arguer could not draw anyconclusion based on such study.

Even assuming the study isstatistically reliable, it is insufficient to prove the implication that bookingindustry will decline in profitability. Even if people make more reference towatching television, it doesn't necessarily follow that people would spend moremoney watching television than reading fiction. The arguer fails to rule outthe possibilities that people would like to spend money on books but they wouldnot like to talk about the fictions in their daily lives. Furthermore, the arguerfails to substantiate the assumption that the whole booking industry willdecline in profit. The arguer fails to rule out that there are lots of kinds ofbooks other than fiction book. It is likely that other kinds of book sell wellin the market. If so, it is likely the profit of the book industry willincrease, even if the fiction books lose profit, which is an unwarranted assumption.Thus, without concrete evidence, the arguer cannot convince me that the lessreference to fiction in daily conversation imply decline profit.

Finally, there isinsufficient evidence to substantiate the recommendation that writers shouldacquire training and experience in writing for television rather than printmedia. Common sense tells us that writers could engage in both types ofwriting.

In sum, the arguer fails toprovide enough evidence to prove the suggestion that writers should acquiretraining and experience in writing for television. To strengthen the argument,the arguer has to offer information that the study is reliable and people'sconversation could reflect their willingness to spend money on television.

missingusaUID: 2625832

lz把帖子标题改一下吧~参考下这个帖子:
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1042201

光辉无敌UID: 2681648

2# missingusa 谢谢