argument140 第一篇argument

sosodiuUID: 2731702

140.The following appeared in a report of the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University.

"During her seventeen years as a professor of botany, Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Her classes
are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students. Moreover, the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. Therefore, in consideration of Professor Thomas' demonstrated teaching and research abilities, we recommend that she receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; without such a raise and promotion,
we fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college."


In the report above, the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University (ECU) made a recommendation of Professor Thomas to get a $10.000 raise in salary and receive a promotion to Department Chairperson, reasoning that she is of extremely popularity among students and presenting remarkable ability in research doing. The committee also reinforces its proposal to express their anxiety that Professor Thomas may leave the school for another college. The recommendation seems logic and accepted at first glance.

However, a major flaw in the argument is that it fails to provide enough essential information and details to make the recommendation sound. It is entirely possible that there are still several competitors among the Botany Department, those who may have same ambitious to be the Department Chairperson and even more outstanding than the Professor Thomas. If it is true, the proposal must be unfair to these persons. In addition, even given the dubious assumption that being the most outstanding among the competitors, it is fallacious to lack the explanation of other aspects of Professor Thomas for this position. For instance, the manage ability. Obviously, a good Department Chairperson has to deal with lots things not limited in academic research and teaching work. He/she may also to dispose many issues about the development of the department and so force. Having failed to address this distinct information, the argument is undoubtedly unconvincing.

Even if one accepts the absence of more relative information, the argument still remains questionable of the evidence it provides. Firstly, only judging from the largeness of the classes, one cannot determine the popularity of a professor. is possible that the Professor Thomas’s classes are some compulsory theoretic courses, in which the most students are required to take. Thus, more data is needed such as the present rate, students’ evaluation and so on. Secondly, even if each of the last two years Professor Thomas contributed a valuable amount of research grants to the school, we cannot participate the following years she could also be beneficial to the school. Two years among her seven years working experience in the school is really a relative short period to definite her research abilities. To be more convincing, the author is supposed to offer more details about Professor Thomas’s contribution and capacity.

In further support to the analysis, the author mentions that the Professor Thomas may have a job- hopping to another college, which adds the necessity to give the raise and promotion. However, the argument fails to show more evidence about this. It is entirely possible that Professor is content with the current salary and maybe there is no other school may offer a higher money and position for him. Further more, even if the Professor Thomas does have orientation to change the school, there are certainly other alternative motivation to drive him to do so. For example, the research environment, the equipment and the research investment are the factors one professor may also take into account. The author apparently ignores those possible explanations.

Based on the lack of relative evidence, not well-reasoned analysis, oversimplified assumption, the argument is completely unconvincing to the reader. In order to reinforce the recommendation, the author should contain more aspects of the ability of Professor Thomas, adding more detailed demonstration of his research and teaching capacity and ruling out other possible explanation of his motivation of job-hopping.

sunflower_irisUID: 2720580

In the report above, the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University (ECU) made a recommendation of Professor Thomas to get a $10.000 raise in salary and receive a promotion to Department Chairperson, reasoning that she is of extremely popularity among students and presenting remarkable ability in research doing. The committee also reinforces its proposal to express their anxiety that Professor Thomas may leave the school for another college. The recommendation seems logic and accepted at first glance.(开头概述Argument中的逻辑即可，不用写得很详细，耽误时间，要知道半个小时还是很有限的，而且建议你把however，it suffers several logical flaws之类的话放在开头，因为开头一定要有主旨句，否则会让rater觉得你的立场不够明确。或者直接指出有哪些逻辑错误也可以)
However, a major flaw in the argument is that it fails to provide enough essential information and details to make the recommendation sound. （这句开头有些大了，可以从小的逻辑点说起，这句可以放在开头或者结尾去，其实这段的主题说的是Professor Thomas不是唯一人选，或者说不是最合适的人选，记得把段落主旨说清楚）It is entirely possible that there are still several competitors among the Botany Department, those who may have same ambitious to be the Department Chairperson and even more outstanding than the Professor Thomas. If it is true, the proposal must be unfair to these persons. In addition, even given the dubious assumption that being the most outstanding among the competitors, it is fallacious to lack the explanation of other aspects of Professor Thomas for this position. For instance, the manage ability. Obviously, a good Department Chairperson has to deal with lots things not limited in academic research and teaching work. He/she may also to dispose many issues about the development of the department and so force. Having failed to address this distinct information, the argument is undoubtedly unconvincing.
Even if one accepts the absence of more relative information, the argument still remains questionable of the evidence it provides.（太空泛） Firstly, only judging from the largeness of the classes, one cannot determine the popularity of a professor. It is possible that the Professor Thomas’s classes are some compulsory theoretic courses, in which the most students are required to take. Thus, more data is needed such as the present rate, students’ evaluation and so on. Secondly, even if each of the last two years Professor Thomas contributed a valuable amount of research grants to the school, we cannot participate the following years she could also be beneficial to the school. Two years among her seven years working experience in the school is really a relative short period to definite her research abilities. To be more convincing, the author is supposed to offer more details about Professor Thomas’s contribution and capacity.（总结不错，可以在开头就这样概括）
In further support to the analysis, the author mentions that the Professor Thomas may have a job- hopping to another college, which adds the necessity to give the raise and promotion. However, the argument fails to show more evidence about this. It is entirely possible that Professor is content with the current salary and maybe there is no other school may offer a higher money and position for him. Furthermore, even if the Professor Thomas does have orientation to change the school, there are certainly other alternative motivation to drive him（her,注意看题目） to do so. For example, the research environment, the equipment and the research investment are the factors one professor may also take into account. The author apparently ignores those possible explanations.

Based on the lack of relative evidence, not well-reasoned analysis, oversimplified assumption, the argument is completely unconvincing to the reader. In order to reinforce the recommendation, the author should contain more aspects of the ability of Professor Thomas, adding more detailed demonstration of his research and teaching capacity and ruling out other possible explanation of his motivation of job-hopping

其实文章不错，有思路，观点发展的也很充分，行文流畅。
问题还是有的，每段的主旨不清损害了你整体思路的清晰性。切记主旨句不要用空泛的话来说，要一针见血，这段攻击的是什么点就说什么点，第一，Professor Thomas不是唯一或者说最好的选择，第二，过分估计了她的能力，第三，她不一定会跳槽，就算要跳也不是钱就能留的住的，这样的观点在开头就可以摆出来，清晰有力。还有一点我觉得你的第二点和第一点可以调换下，第一，过分估计了她的能力，第二就算有能力也不是唯一或者最好的，第三就算她是最好的也不一定会跳槽。这样下来递进关系就更明确，你觉得呢?
我还是很喜欢你的内部分析的，考虑全面批驳也有力度，这是很大的优点。整理好段落间的联系和段落主旨概括相信会是篇好文章。

sosodiuUID: 2731702

2# sunflower_iris

其实是先丢进WORD里去把红叉叉都改了的 否则就有点惨不忍睹了。

看了你的修改启发很大!!因为自己一直不知道如何分类一些逻辑错误，所以第一句就只用很宽泛的语言压一下，思路也常常是写的过程中理。不知道你还会不会来看到这里，，，我好想问，是不是第一句可以不是指明这是什么逻辑错误，而直接写例如“仅有以上的信息，作者无法让读者信服Professor Thomas是唯一适合这个岗位的人选”这样作为段落首句呢？     还有一个问题，，前提和假设是什么区别嗯?我好像分不太清

sunflower_irisUID: 2720580

抱歉这么晚了才回复你，我确实没有看到，如果有问题可以PM我，这样我就能及时看到信息了。
你所问的段落主旨句可以这么写，不用被专业的逻辑错误术语吓到。关键在于你如何让你的观点成立，如何反驳作者的观点。
前提和假设的区别这个问题，前提就是使一个判断成立的判断或者事实，假设就是基于一个事实的假定的说明，当然假设也可以是前提。举个例子来说，一个男孩他每天送你花，在你生病的时候照顾你，在你不开心的时候安慰你，这表示他喜欢你，于是你喜欢他了。那么他喜欢你，以及他所做的一切都是你喜欢他的前提。但是他从没有表白过，所以他喜欢你这个前提就是一个假设，基于他所做的一切的一个假设，这个假设也是你喜欢他的一个前提对不对？这就是为什么一个假设可以成为前提。在A里面，通过一个study或者survey所推导出来的结论就是假设，而根据这个假设推导出另一个结论的时候，这个假设就成为了下一个结论的前提。这样可明白了？

sosodiuUID: 2731702

4# sunflower_iris


很清晰~thanks!

sosodiuUID: 2731702

TOPIC: ISSUE88 - "Technologies not only influence but actually determine social customs and ethics."
WORDS: 576          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2010-4-15 15:00:10


Perhaps most people today are quite adapted with the new lives technologies bring to us even without realizing how significant some different social values and customs evolve compared to even decades ago. It is no surprising that technologies have brought not only its influence in people's daily life, but also several changes of intrinsic thoughts of human beings. In this point, I do hold a positive view towards the assertion the speaker offers. However, speak of determination of social customs and ethics, I have to admit that no any single element can affect itself and even eliminate former ones as the statement reveals. Personally, the technologies only create the opportunities along with other factors for those changes have happened in recent years, even longer time period, rather than play a decisive role.

Admittedly, influence of technologies, seen from its significantly updating of hard ram in daily lives to breakthrough in human beings' value and traditions, does equally occur to social spiritual part-social customs and ethics. Case in point, the new industrial and modern production free the man from being manual labor, opening a new era of skills surpassing manual labor with dead day of man dominating the whole world. It is a necessary and decisive factor to be responsible for the gradual increasing social status of women all over the world. In other aspects of daily life, the media technology has brought a even modern world to human beings. The film, which appeared in late eighteen century, has been booming since the day it was born, with numerous new value systems instilling into audience's mind. Many region all around the world started to accept the existence of non-traditional sex orientation, the new term of gay, lesbian, some things most people decades ago cannot even talk in the desks. Undoubtedly, a new era accordingly happens to us, with advent of new technologies every single day.

The debates towards technologies have been raised and continued. No one can deny influence of it and even those who are against with new technologies have to admit that the changes it brings are out of human beings' expectation at most time. The years of rapid technology developing have also witnessed series of social customs and ethics collapsing in some certain nation and religion.
Once being hold by some certain people, that technologies nowadays are answering some questions that can only be answered by religion before. People thousands years ago might turn to god for some kind of help now can be answered or solved by certain technologies. It is surprising to see church in UK, even other countries, staying half empty now. Can technologies replace religion, at least to some extent? I guess this answer is complex and ambiguous.

However, in other regions, such as eastern Asia, people still insist their belief even more and more phenomena once they believed to be created and only controlled by certain gods. I have to clarify my point of view the one I have mentioned at first. Like open a gate to women to contribute like men and create new lives themselves, technologies are creating opportunities for people to challenge some former customs and thoughts, measurement of right from wrong, even answer several unknowns supposedly in old days. The social customs and ethics are of complexities and rooting at several aspects of a society such as culture, history, economy, believes. The evolvement of social customs and ethics is process of all factors mixing together. Like premarital sex might be socially accepted even prevailing now in some western countries, it is still a taboo in many countries and region. The development of technology of birth control cannot determine the destiny of premarital sex in those places and tribes, but it does make it socially accepted in other places like America.  

Overall, technologies might bring unexpected and powerful influence to human beings' spiritual parts, but never can individually determine those things.