Argument97 球拍 虽然上一篇文章没人理，坚持发帖就是最大的激励

gengshuotianUID: 2672308

Directions: In this section you will need to write a critique of the argument presented. You are NOT being asked to present your own views on the subject.

TOPIC: ARGUMENT114 - A recently completed study shows that people dwelling in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. A second study shows that elderly residents of buildings with elevators make, on average, twice as many visits to doctors each year as do elderly residents of buildings without elevators. These findings suggest that even a very moderate amount of daily exercise, such as that required to use the stairs leading to and from one's apartment, can increase people's health and longevity. The findings also suggest that new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible.
WORDS: 286
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-3-29 15:20:29

In this argument the speaker recommends that the new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible. Careful examination of the supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the
recommendation.


Firstly, the speaker cite the first study to prove the recommendation. However, the speaker doesn't provide the information about whether the sample is representative enough to reflect the general conditions of all dwellers in apartment buildings. Maybe the group living in the buildings without elevators have higher income and benefit from more health care.In addition, we cannot equate healh with longebity. One can live very long but in his whole life he maybe suffer a terrible disease and we cannot say he is healthy.
So the first study cannot convince me the cause and effect relationship between living in the buildings without elevators and health.


Secondly, in the second study is as groundless as the former one. People visit doctors twice doesn't indicate that they have worse health than those who go to doctors . Maybe they pay more attention to their health and do physical examination frequently. So the second study still cannot provide reasonable evidence.
  

Finally, the argument conclude the recommendation based on the assumption that people who live in the buildings with elevators do less excise than the one who live in the buildings merely with stairs. Using stairs is not the only way to exercise. People live in the buildings with elevators could possibly do more sports than other people.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands.. To bolster the recommendation ,the speaker must provide more information
about the two groups including income, age, profession and other factors that affect health and evidence that people living in the building with elevators do less exercise that the other group.

cooltozeroUID: 2705603

TOPIC: ARGUMENT114 - A recently completed study shows that people dwelling in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. A second study shows that elderly residents of buildings with elevators make, on average, twice as many visits to doctors each year as do elderly residents of buildings without elevators. These findings suggest that even a very moderate amount of daily exercise, such as that required to use the stairs leading to and from one's apartment, can increase people's health and longevity. The findings also suggest that new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible.
WORDS: 286
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-3-29 15:20:29

In this argument the speaker recommends that the new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible. Careful examination of the supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the
recommendation.（好不容易看到一个没有模板化痕迹的开头，简洁干净，值得鼓励，不过你觉得这个题的结论只有一个么建不建电梯么？前面那个suggest 不算？）


Firstly, the speaker cite the first study to prove the recommendation（太模糊，不适合放在开头，而且显得有点啰嗦）. However, the speaker doesn't provide the information about whether the sample is representative enough（这里还攻击它的数据有点不厚道啊） to reflect the general conditions of all dwellers in apartment buildings. Maybe the group living in the buildings without elevators have higher income and benefit from more health care（有点违背常理，还不如说，他们之所以选没电梯的公寓本身就是因为他们的身体好，所以作者混淆了因果顺序）.In addition, we cannot equate healh with longebity. One can live very long but in his whole life he maybe suffer a terrible disease and we cannot say he is healthy.
So the first study cannot convince me the cause and effect relationship（causal relationship) between living in the buildings without elevators and health.(攻击因果关系，大方向没有问题，但是展开不够充分。我向来认为A最难的是展开，这是ETS的考查点，需要你自己的知识。不然就千篇一律了嘛。）


Secondly, in the second study is（grammar problem) as groundless as the former one. People visit doctors twice doesn't indicate that they have worse health than those who go to doctors . Maybe they pay more attention to their health and do physical examination frequently(展开不够，还需要找更多的他因，比如说，没有电梯那一群人因为观念原因不愿意去找医生什么的）. So the second study still cannot provide reasonable evidence.
  

Finally, the argument conclude the recommendation based on the assumption that people who live in the buildings with elevators do less excise than the one who live in the buildings merely with stairs. Using stairs is not the only way to exercise(这里也需要展开，不要只是这样抽象地论述）. People live in the buildings with elevators could possibly do more sports than other people.（你在支持作者的结论么，说体育运动能够什么什么？！！！！）

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands.. To bolster the recommendation ,the speaker must provide more information
about the two groups including income, age, profession and other factors that affect health and evidence that people living in the building with elevators do less exercise that the other group.（我不拍结尾）


其实每一点如果展开充分，字数就不成问题了。每一段两三句话看起来多少点些不合适。

另外，这篇文章没有对结论展开有效的攻击。
首先，你没提出结论，即没有树起靶子。
即使你开头提到了建房子，但是后面的论述中，你怎么就完全忘了建房子不修电梯这么一个事情了呢？
于是你就漏了这个攻击点：即使爬楼梯非常有好处，也不能光顾了这点好处就要牺牲我们生活和工作的效率了么？离开电梯是个什么严重的后果啊？




以上个人意见， 请斟酌采纳···

gengshuotianUID: 2672308

非常感谢楼上的意见，下面是我参考楼上意见做出的修改，请再拍。



TOPIC: ARGUMENT114 - A recently completed study shows that people dwelling in stairs-only apartment buildings (that is, buildings without elevators) live an average of three years longer than do people who live in buildings with both elevators and stairs. A second study shows that elderly residents of buildings with elevators make, on average, twice as many visits to doctors each year as do elderly residents of buildings without elevators. These findings suggest that even a very moderate amount of daily exercise, such as that required to use the stairs leading to and from one's apartment, can increase people's health and longevity. The findings also suggest that new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible.
WORDS: 286          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-3-29 15:20:29

In this argument the author concludes that moderate amount of daily exercise is beneficial to people’s health as well as longevity and the new apartment buildings should be constructed with as few elevators as possible Careful examination of the supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the conclusions.

    Firstly, the first study, which the author to argue cited is not sufficient for such conclusions to be drawn. Common sense tell us that people with good health tends to choose apartments with stairs only and those with poor health would like to live in apartments with elevators. So the better health and longevity could possibly be the reason rather than the result of dwelling in stairs-only apartments. In addition ,it’s entirely possible that people living in apartments with both elevators and stairs use stairs as often  as ,or more frequently than the people living in apartments without elevators.  So the first study cannot convince me the cause and effect relationship between living in the buildings without elevators and health.

   Secondly,  the second study is as groundless as the former one. More frequent visits to doctors do not necessarily suggest a worse health status. The observed health seeking difference between two groups, is perhaps not linked to their health but due to more attention and concern over their health in one sample to the other. So the second study does not provide convincing evidence supporting stair climbing as the reason for fewer visits to doctors, not to mention for health and longevity.
   Finally, even if people living in apartments use stairs frequently, which contribute to their good health and longevity, it should not be the reason that new buildings should be constructed with no elevators for it will cause troubles for some residents. For example, old and disabled people have difficulty in walking and climbing stairs and when their apartments are not installed elevators, they will have no means to get out and back home. Elevators are also convenient for people to move their furniture and luggage when who plan to move out of or in the apartments.   In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. Admittedly,  exercise is helpful for people’s health and people should use stairs more but it’s unwise to suggest constructing new building with no elevators.

cooltozeroUID: 2705603

今天时间不多耶，读了一下。
展开不错了。 语言上多努力吧。 你什么时候考啊？   加油！！

gengshuotianUID: 2672308

多谢楼上，还有一个月的时间考