马上就考试了！求改作文

liangboUID: 2777940

TOPIC: ISSUE130 - "How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."
WORDS: 566/565
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2010/4/1 21:05:40

The speaker asserts that the destiny of the society is determined by how children are socialized, and we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society. To some extent, the statement appears to be somewhat convincing, but the speaker overlooks the issue. How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society, and we also know that how to raise them who can help bring about a better society.

On one hand, I concede that how children are socialized today will impact the destiny of society in some ways. Socialization is mainly completed by education. And the basic purpose of education is to cultivate the children to be a qualified citizen, a happy person and the one who can make contributions to our society. Child is influenced most by his parents, and there is no doubt that the parent is the first teacher of the child. With the parents, the children learn the fundamental living skills such as how to speak, how to eat and how to take care of themselves. When they grow older, they are sent to schools to learn academic knowledge and the principles of being a citizen. No doubt that if the students are taught the opinions that about anti-society, the whole world will be in a mass. But to the contrary, if they are well educated with the humanity, they would live in the world under these rulers, and by the knowledge they have acquired they could promote the development of the technology in order to make a better society.

However, we should also concede that the education is held by the government. If the government were anti-humanity, then it would be entirely possible that the children would become their tools to do harm to the whole world. There are many crucial examples in the history. Consider, the German who are under the control of Hitler for example, during the World War Two, the German was taught that the Jews
were Nazis, who should be killed or poisoned. Because of Hitler's own selfish, thousands of people were killed by the German army who were educated by the government. Luckily, the Hitler's government didn't exist at all.

And, a better society is relative. Comprising to the society 1000 years ago, the society we live in now is better, which companies with computer, the telephone and the TV. All the equipments are invited by human beings. And our minds are more open than before, we now more respect people as individuals and we more respect the human rights. For instance, the majorities of people can accept the differences between cultures, are more tolerant to the homosexuals. In these ways, we can conclude that our society is becoming better. And all of these are changed by from generation to generation, who are educated by us human. From (perspective of )
this point, we can be pride to announce that we know how to raise children and render them become the ones who can help bring a better society.

To sum up, in my view, socialization is to tell individuals how to be a qualified member of society, and to cultivate children to be in harmony with the other. The achievements we have acquired can demonstrate that we have already learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society. And I have the faith our society will be much better in the future.


TOPIC: ARGUMENT162 - A recent study shows that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia. Interestingly, Asians, on average, eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. It turns out that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which have been found to possess disease-preventing properties. Thus, North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression.
WORDS: 458/473
TIME: 00:29:35
DATE: 2010/4/1 21:05:40

Merely based on the unfounded assumption and dubious evidence, the arguer concludes that North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression. To support the conclusion, the author points out the evidence that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on continent Asia. In addition, the arguer demonstrates that Asians on average eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. And furthermore, he indicates that soy contain the isoflavones that posses disease-preventing properties. In one word the argument is unfounded.

To begin with, the arguer unfairly assumes that the study is statistics reliable. But the evidence can prove nothing about the assumption. The arguer doesn't put any information about the sample size of the study,
the random of the respondents and the representative of the respondents. I can totally hypothesis that the respondents of the North Americans happen to be the ones who suffer from these two kinds of illnesses. And we can also imagine that the environment of respondents' communities that leads to them get ill. Lacking evidence about the survey, I cannot be persuaded to draw any conclusions.

Similarly, the arguer fails to convince us that there is a relationship between the situation and the Asians eat 20 grams of soy per day on average. The arguer doesn't provide other factors that might lead to this phenomenon. Perhaps, the North Americans like to eat some certain food that can lead to the chronic fatigue and chronic depression. Or perhaps, it is because the Asians like to eat other certain food, which prevent them from suffering these illnesses. And it might not be the soy. Without ruling out other possible and alternative explanations, the arguer is unreasonable to imply us that the soy can prevent people getting the chronic depression and chronic fatigue.

Another problem that may weaken the argument is that the arguer unjustifiably infers that isoflavons can be effective for the people in North America. It just provides the information that the phytochemicals called isoflavones can possess disease-preventing properties. And perhaps, there exist some differences among body structures between them.
Or maybe the phytochemicals could be effective with another certain element that people in North America don’t eat either. Without more comparisons between the two kinds of people, the arguer’s assumption based on the limited information is just irrational.

To sum up, the conclusion that North Americans should consider eating soy ion a regular basis as a very of preventing fatigue and depression is unfounded by the evidence that arguer provides. To get the argument more insightful and logical acceptance, the author should illustrate more about the other differences between the Americans and the Asians, and more detailed information.