坚韧的AW之路

guiyujuanUID: 2898340

A53 修改



ps.感谢楼主对我A53的修改~~我的逻辑思路问题挺大的，例子与论证之间的衔接总是不充分，在Issue部分这个问题就更明显了。。。楼主举例后的推理很到位，在这方面有什么心得吗？

zerrUID: 3006555

I170

夏诺多UID: 2981956

The speaker states that it is the general welfare of its entire people that best indicates the greatness of one(a)
country. As I see it, the general welfare system of onea country stands for its success somehow while the achievements of great peoplegreat people 感觉上像是说人民伟大，而不是伟大的人 also indicate the development of one country and benefit its people.第一段平衡两个观点，但是我认为原题中已经说明两个都是indicator，只是讨论那个更加surest，所以第一段如果采用平衡式，建议突出一下两者皆不可少，同等重要。

Admittedly, welfare of all the people stands for the level of（of 后一定要接冠词或不定冠词） development of the nation it belongs to. A good welfare system helps to create a harmonious society by serving the people affluent existence？ and keeping them rich in spirit这个表述有点中式了吧，不知道英语里有没有。。. Only a great country has the source to maintain an even and long-lasting welfare system建议将has the source to改成can. On the contrary, it is the responsibility of a nation to support education, pension, medical treatment and other kinds of welfare for its people. In the history, some nations focused merely on the outside facade of themselves, showing off their power and the achievements of its great men,while regardless what a miserable life their people were suffering from. During the Cold War, countries like Soviet Union, crazy形容词前的be动词呢 of strengthening their army force and competing with western countries, just ignored同一句话前后时态应一致 to provide welfare to their people. Although there were still some great men in such countries, regarding their people's poor life, we can never say these are great, as they failed to guarantee their people the feeling of happiness.  

However, it is also the truth that great men such as rulers, artists and scientists also stand for a country. At most timesin most cases, only the country with a successful social welfare system has the chance to develop人不能‘发展’出来。只能cultivate its great people. A great ruler elected by the people suggests a good political system, as tyrannies and mediocrity leaders often result in a political system in which people have no right to decide who to lead them. Great artists represent the prosperity of a nation's culture.  For the scientists, they stand for the success of the educational system of their country. The greatness of an individual person not only lies in his own gift and diligence, but also results from the society and nation he belongs to. In this way, we can appraise the development of a country by studying its great men.

Furthermore, countries that own plentiful great men are more likely to serve their people satisfactory welfare, as only through good social welfare system such as educational and medical systems can there be well-educated and healthy people, hence the generation of great men?. On the contrary, it is also the great men's responsibility to improve the welfare system of their country for the people. As to the ruler of a nation, who take the responsibility to enact laws and govern the society. A clever and levelheaded leader can keep the country strong and in peace. People can benefit from the great ideas of such a great ruler. The artists compose只有作曲能用这个词 great artistic works to cheer up and enlighten the people. Scientists should create？ to facilitate people's life. All the work done by great men should at least on the purpose to benefit the people and only in this way can there be a great nation.
感觉有点偷换概念，把welfare换成了welfare system，前者是指福祉，后者单只福利制度。福祉的概念更广。
另外第一段给人感觉是两个一样重要，但是中间文章感觉是说伟人更重要。。

坚韧杀神UID: 2703697

A7
Words: 509 Time:2h
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper. “In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

In this argument, the speaker suggests Clearview residents in voting for Ann Green, rather than Frank Braun, as the next mayor in order to solve the environmental problems caused by current town council.  To support his suggestion, the speaker provides several examples such as the increase of factories, air pollution levels and patient suffering from respiratory illness. However, after reading through it, we can find out several logical flaws in this argument which weak its cogency.
At the first place, the speaker tries to accuse the increase of the number of factories to the negligence of the current council; however, as we all know, most times it is the need of market, rather than the government or anyone else, that basically determines the number of newly built factories in a certain place. Factors like abundant natural resource relatively lower labor cost and satisfactory transportation systems all naturally attract entrepreneur to set up their own business in Clearview.

Secondly, no causal relationship necessarily lies in the increase of factories and environmental problem.  For one reason, discharging no contaminants, some kinds of factories, such as waste recycling factories, are actually environment-friendly. The critical point is not the number of factories, but the pattern of them. For another reason, with strict environmental protection laws and a powerful supervision mechanism, surly the environment will be protected from pollution, even if there are large quantities of factories. Furthermore, the increase in number of factories actually indicates the industrial success of the town, which enables the council to allocate more financial resource in protecting the environment.

At last but not the least, the current mayor shouldn't be blamed for all the failure of environmental policy alone. The decrease of environment level should be regarded as a fault of all the council members, not the mayor himself. As a commonsense that, in a democratic council, the will of a member is subjected by the will of the majority of all the council members, no exception to even the leader. Nobody can eliminate the possibility that the mayor's appeal to protecting the environment was neglected or ignored by the rest of the council members, who may tend to pay more attention to industrial development. In this way, we cannot say that Braun himself is never the right person as a mayor.


Before I come to conclusion, still we must notice that residents in Clearview should not hastily elect Ann Green as a substitution, as in this argument the speaker provided no evidence to show us Green's wiliness and ability in environment improvement. What if Green turns out to be with even less environmental consciousness than Braun after being elected? Residents of Clearview should have the rights to know more details about the candidates in order to get a "clear view".
To sum up, facing with so many vital logical faults in the argument, we cannot simply follow the speaker’s suggestion. To make it more convincing, the speak should fulfill a more general and cogent survey and residents of Clearview need to think twice before making their choice.

zerrUID: 3006555

A7

坚韧杀神UID: 2703697

A61
word 520, time unlimited
In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.



In this argument, the speakers tries to disproof the result of a study regarding reading habits of Leeville citizens  basing on  the result of a follow-up survey which shows that mystery novels, rather than literary classic, are most frequently borrowed from each public libraries in Leeville. However, the cogency of his allegiance is weaken by several logical flaws lying in his reasoning and the survey itself, which I will discuss as follow:
At the first place, the researcher fails to provide any evidence to prove that the frequency of checking out from public libraries can represents the reading preference by citizens in a certain place. It is likely that some citizens buy their preferred books for collection from bookstores while simply borrow some less-preferred books from libraries to have a quick  browse, which results in a high checked-out frequency of some type of books that are relatively less popular. Compared to the follow-up survey, a more reliable way to study reading habits of Leeville people is to directly ask the citizens about their reading habits, just as what the researcher has done in the former study.
Secondly, the speaker fails to make the difference between definitions of literary classics and mystery novels clear. It is obvious that these two types overlap with each other to a certain extent: some mystery can actually be treated as literary classics. The famous novel series Sherlock Holmes win the title of literary classic by its unpredictable plots and exciting stories; mystery novels created by the recently popular writer Stephen Edwin King have been welcomed and regarded as masterpieces by people all around the world. As such, nobody can deny the possibly that people in Leeville tend to borrow those mystery novels that also belong to the type of literary classic, which is truly their preference.
Thirdly, in the argument we cannot find any information regarding the way that the follow-up survey was carried out. We have no idea about what were the questions the follow-up survey provided to the citizens, nor do we know how many people it covered. If the follow-up survey was one with biased questions or with a sample that was insufficiently large enough, then it is very likely resulted in inaccurate result. Therefore, in a lack of essential information, we cannot justify the validity of the follow-up survey, not to say disproof the result of the former one.
At final, even if we accept the validity of the result of the follow-up survey, still we cannot harshly draw the conclusion that the former study failed to represent the reading habits, as people's reading habits basically change with time. Since the speaker fail to mention in this argument the interval of time between two survey, we cannot eliminate the possibly that people' s reading preference switch from literary classic to mystery novels during the period of time between the two studies, which lead to the difference between their results.
To sum up, facing with so many logical faults in the argument, we cannot simply accept the speaker’s allegiance. To check the result of the first study, a more deliberately designed survey is needed.

坚韧杀神UID: 2703697

I184 未加入结尾
The speaker holds the opinions that theorizing before one has data is a grave mistake. To some extent, hi is rational. However, as I see it, data is not the prerequisite of theory and surly we can set up our theory before we have sufficient data.
There is no denying that data is really essential in both scientific and social research. As to scientists, by analyzing experimental data, they can find out the natural laws lying behind the digits, hence great forward in research.  For socialist, data enable them to get rid of the potential misperceive of language (which is relatively less reliable) and get to know the essence of social systems. Without data, economist can never bring out any practical solutions to problems in economical area. Without data, physicists will fail to make their results cogent. In the history, benefiting from accurate data, many great minds set up their own theory. Based on the astronomical data that had been collected for hundreds of years, Kepler built up the great 'three l laws of planetary motion', which gave birth to modern astronomy. By analyzing data got from X-ray test, Watson brought out the structural model of DNA as ‘double helix'. Their success has proven to us that data is a reliable and indispensible tool in research.   

However, must we theorize after we already have got data? The answer is no. For one reason, in some technological fields such as math, as the issues are really abstract, scientific have no access to sufficient data, theorizing only by assumption and critical thinking. For another reason, sometimes only through bold assumption can we build up our own theories. Consider the mass wave theory as an example.  As data could hardly be obtained due to temporal experimental equipments, de Broglie set up this theory only by analogizing the wave-like behavior of particles to that of light and used the data to check his theory afterwards. In this way, we can see that data may not be the prerequisite of theory.


Furthermore, relying on the data too much sometimes turns out to be an obstacle on the way to a new theorem. In the history, many people depended on too much on data obtaining, developing into ‘data bigot’. Busy with measuring and surveying, they forgot to critically think themselves. As such, they were cautious, with imagine limited by data, lingering before the gate of discovery. It is time that we got rid of the rigid thought that data must be obtained before theorizing and devoted ourselves into boldly assumptions and critically thinking.

guiyujuanUID: 2898340

A161 修改

坚韧杀神UID: 2703697

TOPIC: ISSUE25 - "Anyone can make things bigger and more complex. What requires real effort and courage is to move in the opposite direction-in other words, to make things as simple as possible."
WORDS: 433          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2011/3/24 13:07:49

The fast development of science and technology has brought us into the era of information, a time that things change quickly becoming more and more complicate. Facing with such a complicate world, I, in agreement with the speaker, hold the opinion that instead of making world more complex, making things as simple as possible calls for real effort and courage.
Admittedly, in some domains complexity is welcomed. People embrace with the deliberately designed software, which can solve many practical problems. The more functions a software owns, the more it is welcomed by costumers. Such as computer engineering, as to scientist, a relatively more complicate model can describe real situation more exactly. As such, we should pay attention to make things more complex in some particular domains.

However, although complex enables us to enjoy a deliberate life, we should put more efforts in simplifying. For one reason, complexity turns out to be confusing and low efficiency. Just like a machine with too many buttons cannot be easily be handled with, a system with too many functions and branches and details will inevitably turns out to be a failure.  A complicate official system cannot work well, as it is difficult for officers from different department to cooperate together. Simplicity, on the contrary, means a clear profile and high efficiency. In the history, the nomadic ethnic military threaten to other ethnics that depended on agriculture. Their success in military mainly lies in their highly simplified military system. The commander of the nomadic ethnic could better control his army, hence leading them to win the battle. For another reason, before we can develop out complicate products, we actually need to abstract them into a simple model. It has been proved many times that a simple model is the guide toward more complicate theory. Newton’s three basic laws of classic physics, with a simple profile, make it possible for engineers today build complicate airplanes and rockets; Maxwell theory of electromagnetism enables us to enjoy the television and digital camera.  Simplicity serves as the foundation of complexity. Without simplicity, it is impossible for us to make our life complicate. Without a blueprint, edifice cannot be built up; without a syllabus, courses cannot be well organized. Since simplicity results in a high efficiency and the serves as the foundation of complexity, real effort should be put to make things simple.