高频求拍！大家相互讨论

怒放的生命UID: 2754391

我写的最认真的一篇了。恭请各位  ！有拍必回！大家一起讨论吧     
Argue 38
The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council." An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."

The author developed the argument through a succession of claims and reasoning. However, the argument contains certain facets that are fallible. A threshold problem is that the author ignores those who are infected with colds but refuses to seek help. The author also fails to notice other explanations for lesser incidence of colds. Again, neither an investigation nor statistics have indicated colds the leading contribution to absenteeism. Adding that there is so little information about Ichthaid to reach any firm conclusion, the argument fails to convey an ordered process of accumulation and rationalization.

First of all, people turn to doctors less frequently doesn't amount to lesser frequencies to catch a cold. Perhaps people, also told the experience, are prone to take some medicine and adequate sleep and relaxation when dealing with colds unless they become severely deteriorating. It is obviously ridiculous that judging the situation of cold-catching merely by means of calculating the times people appeal to doctors.

Even if one accepts the accuracy of the statistical data, the author arbitrarily assumes that the lower frequency of colds is
attributable to a high consumption of fish. But the author fails to provide satisfying evidence to bolster the conclusion combined with alternative potentialities. Such substitutes might include the fact that East Meria is a geological region where the climate changes little or the weather is warmer and moister, in which case people are less susceptible to colds. It is entirely possible that citizens as a whole emphasize the predominance of daily health. Other expositions are left out purposively, including a pleasant sanitation and effective preventive measures. Factors related above could elucidate the lower frequency of colds and could undermine the dependability and reliability of the causal relationship.

What's more, the author draws a conclusion and goes so far as to appeal merely to social convention. The author should have provided credible statistical data, yet he fails to, which would convince others that colds are the reason most frequently given for absences and lower incidence of colds, thus, would undoubtably lessen absenteeism. Or at least, the author would have cited a persuasive survey whose result could more or less verify the argument. Since the author takes it for granted that colds are totally responsible to absence, the generalization drawn might not apply to most situation.

Finally, even acknowledging the exactness of all stated above, the argument remains dubious. The author mistakenly considers that fish oil plays the same role as fish. Not only hasn't the author present reference material to exhibit that they can substitute each other, but provides no grounds that it is Ichthaid, rather than extra ingredient in the fish oil, that comes to play. So little notice is taken of these issues that the argument eventually collapses.

Unwise and irrational, the author claims consecutive as well as groundless evidence, through which an ultimate recommendation is originated, an unconvincing one as a matter of cause. The argument could be improved by providing evidence that colds are indeed the most intense reason for absence, and that eating a considerable amount of fish is sufficient to account for immunity to colds. It could be further strengthened by justifying that Ichthaid is of the highest service to preventing colds.

怒放的生命UID: 2754391

没人说话。。我自己顶~~~~~

chinese_idiotUID: 2854284

你读题加分析加写只用30Min?
LZ你的头像有出处么？

怒放的生命UID: 2754391

呃。。不止30分钟呀   挺久的。汗   
头像。。。很普通吧 3# chinese_idiot

追梦小木耳UID: 2781857

The author developed the argument through a succession of claims and reasoning. However, the argument contains certain facets that are fallible. A threshold problem is that the author ignores those who are infected with colds but refuses to seek help. The author also fails to notice other explanations for lesser incidence of colds. Again, neither an investigation nor statistics have indicated colds the leading contribution to absenteeism. Adding that there is so little information about Ichthaid to reach any firm conclusion, the argument fails to convey an ordered process of accumulation and rationalization.
开头太啰嗦了~错误太多太碎~不如总结出主要错误说一下就行了

First of all, people turn to doctors less frequently doesn't amount to lesser frequencies to catch a cold. Perhaps people who catch a cold do not prefer to see doctors but, also told the experience, are prone to take some medicine and用了太多and了，换成逗号吧 adequate sleep and relaxation when dealing with colds unless they become severely deteriorating. It is obviously ridiculous that judging to judge the situation of cold-catching merely by means of calculating the times people appeal to doctors.

Even if one accepts the accuracy of the statistical data, the author arbitrarily assumes that the lower frequency of colds is attributable to a high consumption of fish. But上一句已经说过作者的假设是武断的了，这里就没有必要用but了 the author fails to provide satisfying evidence to bolster the conclusion combined with alternative potentialities. Such substitutes might include the fact that East Meria is a geological region where the climate changes little or the weather is warmer and moister, in which case people are less susceptible to colds. It is entirely possible that citizens as a whole emphasize the predominance of daily health. Other expositions are left out purposively, including a pleasant sanitation and effective preventive measures. Factors related above could elucidate the lower frequency of colds and could undermine the dependability and reliability of the causal relationship.

What's more, the author draws a conclusion and goes so far as to appeal merely to social convention. The author should have provided credible statistical data, yet he fails to, which would to convince others that colds are the reason most frequently given for absences and that lower incidence of colds, thus, would undoubtably lessen absenteeism. Or at least, the author would have cited a persuasive survey whose result could more or less verify the argument. Since the author takes it for granted that colds are totally responsible to absence, the generalization drawn might not apply to most situation.

Finally, even acknowledging the exactness of all stated above, the argument remains dubious. The author mistakenly considers that fish oil plays the same role as fish. Not only hasn't Neither has the author present reference material to exhibit that they can substitute each other, but provides no grounds nor does he provide proof that it is Ichthaid, rather than extra ingredient in the fish oil, that comes to play. So little notice is taken of these issues that the argument eventually collapses.

Unwise and irrational, the author claims consecutive as well as groundless evidence, through which an ultimate recommendation is originated, an unconvincing one as a matter of cause. 看你这一句话用了多少个同义词The argument could be improved by providing evidence that colds are indeed the most intense reason for absence, and that eating a considerable amount of fish is sufficient to account for immunity to colds. It could be further strengthened by justifying that Ichthaid is of the highest service to preventing colds.

感觉语言有点绕，似乎作者刻意用了复杂的从句。
错误都找出来了，逻辑性比较强
开头和结尾还需加强~都比较啰嗦

追梦小木耳UID: 2781857

先改别人的文章，再要求别人改你的文章
把文章发到零散版友互改的帖子里
加入互改小组

怒放的生命UID: 2754391

辛苦你了~可能怕说不清楚就说的详细了些    看来有点过了   恩  确实需要简洁一下
呃  一直怕误导别人   因为不知道自己见解是不是正确   就没敢下手给别人改
不过，，可能我想多了吧     人都有自己的判断力
非常非常感谢！
6# 追梦小木耳