【NINE小组】第八次作业—by 玉米

oncoUID: 3114426

ISSUE 69 Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.

Political leaders, largely representing theirparty, are in most cases funded by the public. It is natural for a politicalleader to make his public informed on daily operations and future project. Thisrelationship is particularly analogous to some research foundations and labs:The patrons give out their money voluntarily in exchange for some future achievementsbeneficial to their own, and without doubt, they have the right to keep focusedon the ongoing progress and expenditure.

This righteous demand, however, issometimes contradicted by political leaders, in the name of "maintainingthe public security", especially when they are in the control of a stateor nation. They often show their confidence in security and their leadershipgroups, and then claim that they have given the public the best choice that aleader can offer. But historically, it has been repeatedly proved a vicious wayof maintain their political power, and a self-fish disguise of pursing theirown interest, but with no regard to their people. Let's take the Chernobylmeltdown, for example. When the reactor exploded, the then Ukrainianauthorities and Soviet officials, who were in fear of the potential riot, made thenews confidential and insidiously covered up everything. Though ironically, itwas known to everyone in the upper echelons, the authorities still launched a campaignto persuade Ukrainians nothing was wrong. The people in town of Chernobyl,which was just nine miles from the reactor, not evacuated in time, thus sufferedtragically, and thousands of cases of cancer aroused are now thought to belinked to the disaster.

Essential though it might be, it is actuallyimpractical, and also impossible, to ask a political leader to unveil all theinformation, since there indeed exists some projects or documents, which, forinstance, may aim at eliminating terrorists. In the consideration of nationalsecurity, no one in the country will deny the importance of confidentiality.But in fact, the public are not so concerned with the information itself, butcare more about the freedom of practicing their rights. The public can never bedeprived of this justifiable right, but the corresponding response frompolitical leaders then becomes a tricky problem.

Fortunately, we have another element in thesociety. The law, which is always dependent of both the public and politicalleaders, can serve as a fair solution, since the leaders then could beprotected under the provision of law. As a result, the law provides a win-winsolution, and brings this game to an end -- both sides finally manage to seek abalance that is most profitable. As the public are endowed with rights to makesure there's no corruption, they will not be discontent with the politicalleaders and the political leaders, on the other hand, would be pleased to findthemselves no longer stuck in a dilemma between revealing the official secretsand facing public censure.

oncoUID: 3114426

ARGUMENT 163Absenteeism, colds and the plant beneficia

The author claims a positive correlation between the intake of plant beneficia and reducing absenteeism. But this argumentis poorly supported by few evidences and its logic is largely based onassumptions. The claim might be true, but only before more evidences aresupported, or some detailed questions are answered.

A basic question is, how relevant is the absenteeism with colds? Although I admit catching colds is the most commonreason leading to absenteeism, but it should not be the sole one. Sometimes that we don't go to work does not necessarily mean that we cannot go to work. Asudden impulse or long time laziness would temporarily keep us from our duties as well. So we have to confirm whether the large amount of absentees fromschool and work are due to colds.

If, after conducting a detailed and trustworthy survey, the link between colds and absenteeism has been stronglybuilt, there are still not enough evidences to prove consumption of the plant beneficia will make people less likely to have colds. The author mentions that people living in nearby East Meria have a high consumption of the plant beneficia, and visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. But he falsely makes an equation, in which visiting the doctor less equals falling ill less. For example, people there may often have colds, but unfortunately, they are too poor to afford the medical costs. Or on thecontrary, people there are rich and are indeed less prone to have colds, but the rare rate of having colds might attributes to be the agreeable climate or the enhancing health care, not the consumption of beneficia.

In addition, it can be hardly dismissed that the author recommends to his people the daily use of nutritional supplements of beneficia, instead of the direct consumption of that. While some people are still dubious about other nutritional supplements, how can the author prove that this kind of supplements would particularly earn people’s trust? On the other hand, lack of scientific research, the mechanism of the functioning elements still remains uncertain. Since we have no idea of what element actually works, how can the nutritional supplements be practically produced containing the desired nutritional elements?

The notion that we can reduce absenteeism only by eating beneficia sounds absurd at first glance, and then proved infeasible after a deep analysis. Despite the potential possibility that beneficia prevents colds, it would by no means serve as a way of handling absenteeism. The phenomenon of absenteeism is not only caused by physiological reasons. Mental and sociology causes, also contributes a lot.

amber_cUID: 3131341

Political leaders, largely representing their party, are in most cases funded by the public. It is natural for a political leader to make his public informed on daily operations and future project.（前两句都很符合BEN老师的要求，没有一句话长得累死audience）This relationship is particularly analogous to some research foundations and labs(据xdf老师说，写作不能写简写。Lab是laboratory的简写): The patrons give out their money voluntarily in exchange for some future achievements beneficial to their own, and without doubt, they have the right to keep focused on the ongoing progress and expenditure.

观点很明确，但逻辑性有些弱。尤其是funded by the public，然后和后面的类比。个人觉得political leaders 和 the public的关系不只是fund，可能用supported 会更好一点，不知道玉米怎么看？
This righteous demand, however, is sometimes contradicted by political leaders, in the name of "maintaining the public security", especially when they are in the control of a state or nation. （( ⊙ o ⊙ )BEN老师说，每段首句不多于14个词。不如修改一下？）They often show their confidence in security and their leadership groups, and then claim that they have given the public the best choice that a leader can offer. But historically, it has been repeatedly proved a vicious way of maintain（maintaining） their political power, and a self-fish disguise of pursing their own interest, but with no regard to their people.(历史应该是证明他们说谎或者隐瞒的恶果吧？而不是证明隐瞒背后的动机。) Let's take the Chernobyl meltdown, for example. When the reactor exploded, the Ukrainian authorities and Soviet officials, who were in fear of the potential riot, made the news confidential and insidiously covered up everything. Though ironically, it was known to everyone in the upper echelons, the authorities still launched a campaign to persuade Ukrainians nothing was wrong. The people in town of Chernobyl, which was just nine miles from the reactor, not evacuated in time, thus suffered tragically, and thousands of cases of cancer aroused are now thought to be linked to the disaster.（玉米的语言相对比较简洁，至少比我简洁。举了切尔诺贝利的例子。）
例子很恰当，可是原文貌似缺少中心句。因为例子更倾向于说明隐瞒的后果，但文中没有中心句说明这一点。只说了为了自己的利益，无视人民。我觉得可以说得更直白，例如隐瞒事实会危害人民的安全，blablabla。。。
Essential though it might be, it is actually impractical, and also impossible, to ask a political leader to unveil all the information, since there indeed exists some projects or documents, which, for instance, may aim at eliminating terrorists.（矮油~又该精简句子了哦~）In the consideration of national security, no one in the country will deny the importance of confidentiality. But in fact, the public are not so concerned with the information itself, but care more about the freedom of practicing their rights. The public can never be deprived of this justifiable right, but the corresponding response from political leaders then becomes a tricky problem. 这一段，多少有点本末倒置的感觉。不知道侧重点在哪儿。后面说公众不能被剥夺知情权，但又没有继续展开。
Fortunately, we have another element in the society. The law, which is always dependent of both the public and political leaders, can serve as a fair solution, since the leaders then could be protected under the provision of law. As a result, the law provides a win-win solution, and brings this game to an end -- both sides finally manage to seek a balance that is most profitable. As the public are endowed with rights to make sure there's no corruption, they will not be discontent with the political leaders and the political leaders, on the other hand, would be pleased to find themselves no longer stuck in a dilemma between revealing the official secrets and facing public censure.
这是不是有些off the topic了？而且法律也并不是能管所有事的，leaders隐瞒事实就受到法律制裁，那某些国度的某些party早就OOXX。。。所以我觉得末段值得再斟酌一下。

oncoUID: 3114426

3# amber_c


Political leaders, largely representing their party, are in most cases supported by the public. It is natural for a political leader to make his public informed on daily operations and future project. This relationship is analogous to some research foundations and laboratories: The patrons give out their money voluntarily in exchange for some future achievements beneficial to their own, and without doubt, they have the right to keep focused on the ongoing progress and expenditure.

This righteous demand, however, is sometimes contradicted by political leaders. People’s right has therefore been deprived in the name of "maintaining the public security", especially when those leaders are in control of a state or nation. They often show their excessive confidence in their leadership groups, and then claim that they have given the public the best choice that a leader can offer. But historically, it has been repeatedly proved this behavior a vicious way of maintaining their political power, but with no regard to their people’s civil rights. Let's take the Chernobyl meltdown, for example. When the reactor exploded, the Ukrainian authorities and Soviet officials, who were in fear of the potential riot, made the news confidential and insidiously covered up everything. Though ironically, it was known to everyone in the upper echelons, the authorities still launched a campaign to persuade Ukrainians nothing was wrong. The people in town of Chernobyl, which was just nine miles from the reactor, not evacuated in time, thus suffered tragically, and thousands of cases of cancer aroused are now thought to be linked to the disaster.

Essential though it might be, it is actually impractical, and also impossible, to ask a political leader to unveil all the information. It is undeniable that there indeed exists some projects or documents are highly concerned with state security or economics. But in fact, the public are not so concerned with the information itself, but care more about the freedom of practicing their rights. The public can be rather intimidating if deprived of this justifiable right. But the political leaders, vacillating between the potential dichotomy of revealing information and maintaining political power, can sometimes have a hard time to decide the corresponding response.

Fortunately, we have another element in the society. The law, which is always dependent of both the public and political leaders, can serve as a fair solution, since the leaders then could be protected under the provision of law. As a result, the law provides a win-win solution, and brings this game to an end -- both sides finally manage to seek a balance that is most profitable. As the public are endowed with rights to make sure there's no corruption, they will not be discontent with the political leaders and the political leaders, on the other hand, would be pleased to find themselves no longer stuck in a dilemma between revealing the official secrets and facing public censure.

多谢修改哈
其实这次算有个小小的尝试，就是最后说到了法律的问题。我不知道这样写可不可以。但是我其实是有内在的逻辑在里面的。前面说到政治家经常要在维持自己的政治权利和忽略公众的知情权之间做出抉择，然后他们就很纠结。然后两方需要有个东西权衡，谁也不侵犯谁，于是就有了法律的武器在里面。

此外，你的对最后一段的内容的点评我不是很认可。我觉得虽然某国的PARTY按这么说早就被OOXX了，但是那是该国的XX主义特色。事实上西方的民主制度应该是这样的吧，我觉得既然给西方人写作文，按照西方的逻辑走可能会更好一点吧，我个人也认可西方的逻辑。

我不知道issue这样随性的写可不可以。因为我们一味的按照模板写最后只有一个后果，就是悲剧。但是我并不是很清楚这样算不算跑题。不是说issue提倡自由发挥么==


此外，BEN老师说的首段不超过多少个字那个..我的确不知道。我按照要求改了。不过我觉得只要一句话不要啰嗦就行了。搜了一下范文，有长有短的，也有超过那个字数的。不过第一句简洁倒是可以采纳的。

amber_cUID: 3131341

The author claims a positive correlation between the intake of plant beneficia and reducing absenteeism. But this argument is poorly supported by few evidences and its logic is largely based on assumptions. The claim might be true, but only before more evidences are supported, or some detailed questions are answered.(这句话有点问题，before? 应该是after或者when吧？不知道我的理解有没有问题)


A basic question is, how relevant is the absenteeism with colds? Although I admit catching colds is the most common reason leading to absenteeism, but(although…but??) it should not be the sole one. Sometimes that we don't(do not) go to work does not necessarily mean that we cannot go to work. A sudden impulse or long time laziness would temporarily keep us from our duties as well. So we have to confirm whether the large amount of absentees from school and work are due to colds.
这一段讲缺席与感冒的联系程度。要求更多的证据证明不是其他因素导致缺席。不过，题目也没有说感冒是唯一的原因，只是说很大的原因。而且玉米也在第二句承认了感冒是最common的原因了。可能是想说需要一个有说服力的调查结果？具体我也说不上来，但总觉得逻辑有点小问题。
If, after conducting a detailed and trustworthy survey, the link between colds and absenteeism has been strongly built, there are still not enough evidences to prove consumption of the plant beneficia will make people less likely to have colds. The author mentions that people living in nearby East Meria have a high consumption of the plant beneficia, and visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. But he(or she) falsely makes an equation, in which visiting the doctor less equals falling ill less. For example, people there may often have colds, but unfortunately, they are too poor to afford the medical costs. Or on the contrary, people there are rich and are indeed less prone to have colds, but the rare rate of having colds might attributes to be the agreeable climate or the enhancing health care, not the consumption of beneficia.
这一段说感冒减少的原因不一定是吃了beneficia。其中列举了几种可能，有details，有说服力。
In addition, it can be hardly dismissed that the author recommends to his（xdf老师说忌讳用his，也许是个女的呢？直接去掉可能会好一点） people the daily use of nutritional supplements of beneficia, instead of the direct consumption of that. While some people are still dubious about other nutritional supplements, how can the author prove that this kind of supplements would particularly earn people’s trust? On the other hand, lack of scientific research, the mechanism of the functioning elements still remains uncertain. Since we have no idea of what element actually works, how can the nutritional supplements be practically produced containing the desired nutritional elements?
这一段说nutritional supplement不一定起作用。我建议为了承接上面两段的关系，首句可以写成即使食用b真的可以预防感冒，但不代表NS也可以。因为第三段和第二段的关系是：即使感冒真的是造成缺席的最大原因，但也不代表B可以预防感冒。所以第四段和第三段，就应该是即使B真有效，但不代表NS有效。
The notion that we can reduce absenteeism only by eating beneficia sounds absurd at first glance, and then proved infeasible after a deep analysis. Despite the potential possibility that beneficia prevents colds, it would by no means serve as a way of handling absenteeism. The phenomenon of absenteeism is not only caused by physiological reasons. Mental and sociology causes, also contributes a lot.
由于题目要求是discuss what questions would be answered, 所以可能在末段再重复一下题目证据不足的地方会更切合题目要求。纯属个人观点~
本文环环相扣，逻辑性还是比较强的。三个点的组织也比较好~值得我学习

oncoUID: 3114426

The author claims a positive correlation between the intake of plant beneficia and reducing absenteeism. But this argument is poorly supported by few evidences and its logic is largely based on assumptions. The claim might be true, but only after more evidences are supported, or some detailed questions are answered.

A basic question is, how relevant is the absenteeism with colds? Although I admit catching colds is the most common reason leading to absenteeism, it should not be the only one. Sometimes that we do not go to work does not necessarily mean that we cannot go to work. A sudden impulse or long time laziness would temporarily keep us from our duties as well. So we have to confirm whether the large amount of absentees from school and work are due to colds.

If, after conducting a detailed and trustworthy survey, the link between colds and absenteeism has been strongly built, there are still not enough evidences to prove consumption of the plant beneficia will make people less likely to have colds. The author mentions that people living in nearby East Meria have a high consumption of the plant beneficia, and visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. But the author falsely makes an equation, in which visiting the doctor less equals falling ill less. For example, people there may often have colds, but unfortunately, they are too poor to afford the medical costs. Or on the contrary, people there are rich and are indeed less prone to have colds, but the rare rate of having colds might attributes to be the agreeable climate or the enhancing health care, not the consumption of beneficia.

Even if the assumption that certain consumption of beneficia can be useful, the way how we consume it still need consideration. It can be hardly dismissed that the author recommends the daily use of nutritional supplements of beneficia, instead of the direct consumption of that. While some people are still dubious about other nutritional supplements, how can the author prove that this kind of supplements would particularly earn people’s trust? On the other hand, lack of scientific research, the mechanism of the functioning elements still remains uncertain. Since we have no idea of what element actually works, how can the nutritional supplements be practically produced containing the desired nutritional elements?

The notion that we can reduce absenteeism only by eating beneficia sounds absurd at first glance, and then proved infeasible after a deep analysis. Despite the potential possibility that beneficia prevents colds, it would by no means serve as a way of handling absenteeism. The phenomenon of absenteeism is not only caused by physiological reasons. Mental and sociology causes, also contributes a lot.