【NINE小组】【作业集】---by lovetian (更新至第十二次I)

lovetianUID：2899734

第一篇 I
The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you
take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these
considerations shape your position.

Does it depend on the type of life which people live being luxury and convenient that they cannot develop into truly strong and have independent individuals? The speaker claims so, however, in my view, I tend to agree with this theory that whether a person can develop into truly strong and independent characteristics or not has not so much business with the living condition. Many other reasons, such as ignoring her selves’ value or always being doubted by her surrounding people, can result this consequence that she cannot develop into truly strong and independent individual.

Firstly, in my opinion, whether life is luxury and convenient or not does not have so much influence in the formation of a person’s personality, that is to say, people can develop into a truly strong independent characteristic with such life if they hold vigorous attitudes toward life. Maybe you know BILL GATES'S HOUSE, which has a total assessed value of 147.5 million U.S dollars, is a house designed in the Pacific lodge style with classic features such as a large private library with a dome shaped roof and all the rooms in this house can automatically adjust temperature, music, and lighting based on the guest's preferences. Apparently, living in this luxury and convenient house doesn’t let Gates away from a person with strength and independence.

Then, finding the value of their own is one of the most significant factors in developing into truly strong private person, especially when she lives in this extravagant and convenient life. In our daily life, we face to many troubles we should work out, however, if a female who haven't discovered her value had to solve the problem, she will be vulnerable, although she is able to settle the matter, because she, a normal woman without confidence, don't firmly believe she can do this. After uncountable failures, I believe the woman couldn't develop into a truly powerful and freedom person, even she does not live in a life with internet, cars, planes and iPhone. But if a person who has already noticed his value, no matter if he lives in a convenient contemporary life, he will be successful in achieving a strong heart by confidence and success. Besides finding their value can make them grow into really powerful and freedom people, support from the people around you, especially from your friend can also let you achieve the same aim.


Finally, it is true that a person lives in a contemporary life with high technology and innumerable attractions which will lure her; furthermore the prediction that these enticements will make her far away from becoming a truly strong and independent individual is not unfounded. But unless she live alone and stay in a place with nothing but herself, she won't find a place with no attraction in our society, so whether you live in a luxury life is not a primary things, attitude toward the life full of luxuries and convenience and what we do in this kind of life are determinant, this kind of life couldn't prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.

lovetianUID：2899734

第九篇 I
Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

I don't agree with the author's claim, and in my view, the goal of politics should be the pursuit of both an ideal and the common ground and reasonable consensus. Ideal, as well as common ground and reasonable consensus, is important to the politicians and society, and ideal can contribute to the common welfare of whole human race; common ground and reasonable consensus is the best way to solve recent social problems.

In the short term, searching for common ground and reasonable consensus in politics will solve current social troubles effectively and make the well-being of society and people better. Since common ground reasonable consensus is the prerequisite of any stable society, without which talking about any ideal makes no senses. Chairman Deng, for instance, instead of gripping the idealism of communism, enacted the marvelous and far-reaching policies of "one country, two systems", which earned not only national support but also international acknowledgement. This is a policy, which lead to the result of compromise, alleviate the opposite difference between capitalism and socialism, and successfully make the unite of Hong Kong to its motherland, China.

However, in the long term, it is important and necessary for politicians to pursue an ideal, which aim at gaining the common welfare of all the civilians. Only pursuing the common ground and reasonable consensus and ignoring the essential ideal will make the country lose its profit constantly and disappear from the Earth eventually. Gandhi, an Indian spiritual leader who leaded the nonviolent resistance movement and finally won the independence of India from the Great British, is such a politician who only pursues the ideal in his mind and neglects the common consensus. Without the pursuit of the ideal for many decades and with the common ground and reasonable consensus, India may be still a colony of British.

In sum up, it is true that politicians can pander and compromise to build a consensus so as to overcome some short-term problems, but when it comes to a long-term one, insisting the ideal in their mind is what they should do. Politicians should not only pursue the common consensus in order to gain his/her political power, but also keep the pursuit of an ideal in their mind, even which is elusive.

panmingming2008UID：2535351

8# winterfine
把之前的习作一稿\同学批改稿\修改稿 都传上来. 这样的【习作集】会很赞.

主帖若改为"【NINE小组】【作业集】---by LOVETIAN （第xx次习作已更新）" 会更好.
也方便批改的同学前后参考, 自己也能上下浏览发现重复犯的错误 -- 然后通过"重点打击" 重点练习加以改进.

I am the master of my fate.
I am the captain of my soul.

"Invictus" (2009 film)

自胜者强。

COME ON!

lovetianUID：2899734

第六篇 A
The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors.
Over 80 percent of the respondents to a recent survey indicated a desire to reduce their intake of foods containing fats and cholesterol, and today low-fat products abound in many food stores. Since many of the food products currently marketed by Old Dairy Industries are high in fat and cholesterol, the company's sales are likely to diminish greatly and company profits will no doubt decrease. We therefore advise Old Dairy stockholders to sell their shares, and other investors not to purchase stock in this company."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.

In this argument, the author recommends that Old Dairy (OD) stockholders should sell their shares, and other investors shouldn't purchase stock in this company. To strengthen this recommendation, he/she cites a report, in which most of respondents show an attitude that they would like to reduce their intake of foods containing fats and cholesterol, while OD's most food products are high in fat and cholesterol. Seemingly, this recommendation is somewhat persuasive; in fact, it provides little credible support for the effectiveness of such investment advice.

To begin with, the report cited in this argument claims that most of people would change their eating habit. However, this might not be the case. The arguer obviously overlooks other possible explanations for this result. Firstly, the report doesn't tell us the real number of respondents and only provides a vague proportion, we have every reason to doubt the authenticity of this report. Perhaps there are only 10 people to take such report and 8 people are the employees of other Industries which are competing with OD, and perhaps the question in the report are irrational, which trends to reach such a conclusion. Without ruling out such possibilities, the report in this argument has no persuasion to support the idea held by the speaker.

Second, even I concede that the report is rational and the result of it is creditable, the argument is still unreasonable. This report only shows a desire of people that they would like to choose low-fat products in the future, however, such desires maybe just show what kind of food is healthy in their mind but they will still take high-fat foods as usual, such paradox can easily be found
in our daily life. For example, we all know smoking is harmful to our health but there are still millions of people keeping smoking in the Earth. Even though that all the people will really choose low-fat foods and change their eating habits, we still couldn't conclude that OD's sales will decrease. Although many of the food products marketed by OD are high in fat and cholesterol, facing such circumstance, these industies may improve their products and produce low-fat food products in the future. Without accounting for all these explanations, the arguer cannot reasonably draw such a conclusion that the sales of OD will decrease.

Finally, even assuming that the sales of OD decrease for the reason held by the author, it is unbelievable that company profits will no doubt diminish greatly. In the financial market, there exist many ways to obtain profit from besides the sales of an industry. And the price of a stock doesn't only depend on the profit made by the company. Investors can earn money from some companies' stock whose sales are not very good because many investors are selling and buying the stock. Without thinking about these alternatives, the recommendation cannot be accepted by any investor.

To sum up, the arguer's advice about how to deal with the OD's stock is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide move evidences.

panmingming2008UID：2535351

Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
-----------------

I totally disagree with the author's claim that government should fund only for those researches whose consequences are clear. In terms of the essence of research or the reason why should government have a clear picture of research, the argument is unreasonable and absurd. Although a few researches' results have brought some calamities to our human beings, it is just the problem in the way of using scientific technology, scientific research itself is innocent.

To begin with, taking the result of research is clear or not as a factor to determine if government should fund for is a terrible idea. [这个句子有些别扭. 几乎是汉语硬译过来. 要改写.]No one can prove that the investment to any research whose consequence is unclear has no value. We must notice that the essence of scientific research is such a process in which scientists use a logical and systematic way to search for new and unknown information on a particular topic. The invention of Penicillin is such an example that nobody includes Alexander Fleming himself knows what he will find by his experimen

t on bacteriology, not to mention, no one can predict that the result of this research is such a great one, which almost change the whole world and let millions of people away from death. As scientists are search in an undiscovered field, we have no reason to ask them tell us what they will find in the end.

Second, maybe the reason why the author suggests that government should not fund for unclear research is he/she holds the view that investing in some researches which turn to a failure is a waste of money. [句子要从简单造起. 不怕短小, 就怕又长又不清楚.]However, no matter what an experiment's result is, success or failure, it still has value to let government invests in it. For instance, the contrivance of airplane has experienced countless failures until the Wright brothers successfully made the first propeller plane. Although there are so many unsuccessful experiments before the Wright brothers, the huge amount of money government has invested in these failed researches is still desirable, because all these failures do lead to the final success. ( Wright bros的技术发明与美国政府资助与否有关系吗? 例子要与论点有关.)


Finally, it is true that government will fund for some researches whose consequence may cause a calamity to the public without inspecting the research in advance. However, a kind of supervision system can be set up instead of simply holding such recommendation. Government can let someone to supervise and estimate the process of the research they funding for, and through this way, we can successfully avoid the calamity brought by scientific research. Besides, most of calamities made by science are not because the research is harmful to us, but the methods we use might make these disasters happen. If we can use the result of scientific research in some right ways, our society will benefit from it a lot and those unpleasant things will not come true.

In sum up, recommendation made by the author is somewhat irrational; if the government adopt such advice, it is possible that no new discovery will be made. So that, we shouldn’t choose which research to be invested in just by if the research’s consequence is clear or not.

句子要从简短造起.
为文要点是清楚明白. 如果grammar不熟练, 要先从短句写起. 然后对自己不熟悉的语法要点专攻一下, 掌握了一点再学另外的一点. [不是为语法而语法, 而是为把想法表达清楚]
如果你的句子写得清楚, 分数会上来-- 起码不会因为句意不明白而掉到3分以下.

然后再在其他审题\例子方面下些工夫. 例子要与论点相关, 而不是仅仅塞一个例子进来, 与要论证的论点没有直接联系.

想像你跟朋友对话, 这样的例子说明某个道理, 朋友会听得懂吗, 对方会信服吗?

panmingming2008UID：2535351

第六篇 I
[quote]Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position
you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be
advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

Different from the author’s claim, in my point of view, government has no reason to postpone their funding for the arts, especially when significant numbers of their citizens are suffered from hunger and unemployment. Furthermore, compared with funding for art when financial condition is healthy, government should take pains to invest money in art during this hard time that many people are suffering from hunger and losing their jobs. (黑体加粗作为中心论点是清楚的. 接下来的"furthermore" 就不太妥当了. 用一句话简单清楚表达观点是最好的.)

There is no doubt that art can provide a lot to us, like courage and inspiration. These things are very important to us in our daily life as well as to those people experiencing the sorrow of losing jobs or being hungry. Being unemployed, without any money earned, and having to stay at home, these people will possibly be upset and even decadent. But if these people have access to enjoying art in their daily life, this condition will be improved and the public’s psychology will also be healthier than before.[BEN: HOW? WHAT ARE YOUR REASONS to support this claim? ] Holding an exhibition of Inspirational film, opening museums free of charge, and showing encouraging paintings at city center, all of this can be effective to solve problems following the economic slowdown. For instance, if a person takes a glance at Van Gogh's Sunflower at somewhere in daily life, maybe just on their way to home, having seen such a bright and gorgeous picture, people will be inspired with a feeling of encouragement and inspiration. This feeling will be significant to a person so that he/she can be encouraged to fighting against the frustration in life.

Government should fund for art as well as for resolving the surviving troubles. The statement linking funding for art negatively with solving the social problem in a hard time is supposed to be wrong. No evidence can show that government can only fund for one thing among them.[the meaning of this sentence is vague--NOT CLEAR.] Funding for both of them, citizens will be inspired with the faith to overcome the problems, and the market is encouraged by the fund from government, everything will be fine after a period of time. If government only put emphasis on helping the market, since the influence wouldn’t show in a short time, the public will still sink into the feeling of pessimism. In order to get rid of surviving problems, [是想说现存问题吗?正确表达法应为current problems]the government should fund for art as well as realistic problems.

To sum up, government’s funding for art when a lot of people are hungry and losing jobs, which is not oppose to inventing money in some direct methods to solve problem, but helpful to them.

这个conclusion 用的which 从句,  把几个意思串错一起, 句意不清, 读出来有些别扭. [/quote]


本习作中心论点还算清楚, furthermore有些画蛇添足.
分论点还算简单明白. 但是支持的理由略不够有说服力, 例子有些牵强. 并且有不少没有根据支持的claims--这些不能作为理由支持分论点.

一例胜过千言万语. 没有例子硬说理容易沉浸于无依据的空话. 自己读起来不顺畅,

读者更是一头雾水.

语言方面需要多读些简明英文小说, 像牛津书虫系列不错. 通过简明对话吸取造句的基本功.

panmingming2008UID：2535351

3# lovetian

这篇关于gifted children should be identified and educated by society 的习作, 分论点可以再优化下. 另外, 建议把其他同学对习作的修改意见也贴上来-- 拿出来常看看.

进步在于能知不足并专注改进.

lovetianUID：2899734

终于上传完了
原来自己写了这么多了 可是为什么感觉没有什么进步呢？？
求指点

lovetianUID：2899734

第五篇 A
The following appeared in a business magazine.

As a result of numerous complaints of dizziness and nausea on the part of consumers of Promofoods tuna, the company requested that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. Promofoods concluded that the canned tuna did not, after all, pose a health risk. This conclusion is based on tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from Promofoods; the chemists found that of the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea, five were not found in any of the tested cans. The chemists did find small amounts of the three remaining suspected chemicals but pointed out that these occur naturally in all canned foods."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.

In this argument, Promofoods (P) conclude that their product, the canned tuna, did not pose a health risk. To strengthen this conclusion, P provides the conclusion about the tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from P. At first glance, the argument might be somewhat reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

First of all, the argument claims that the canned tuna produced by P don't pose a health risk, which is concluded by the result of tests performed by P's chemists. However, this might not be the case. There obviously exist some other possible explanations for this phenomenon besides having the canned tuna really doesn’t have any relation with dizziness and nausea. Because these chemists are from P, to protect P from being impeached by those ill consumers, and to safeguard the P's interest, those chemists may tell a lie about the result of tests or they may conduct the experiment based on some healthy canned tuna from other companies. Without ruling out such possibilities, I cannot accept P's conclusion that their canned tuna isn't harmful to consumers.

Second, even assuming that the conclusion of tests operated by P's chemists is really based on the recalled cans and what they report is truly the result of their experiments; it is still unbelievable that the canned tuna is healthy. There could be many other explanations to the fact, such as the sample is not big enough to show whether the tuna is health or not. Since the ill people are part of the consumers, maybe some cans cause dizziness and nausea and the others don't. Even I concede that the example is large enough, but the result of tests shows that chemists find small amounts of the three chemicals which may cause symptoms of dizziness and nausea, this may be the reason why some consumers suffer from dizziness and nausea. Although P claims that these three chemicals occur naturally in all canned food, perhaps the amounts of the three chemicals is large enough to cause the diseases. Without accounting for all other explanations, P shouldn't reasonably conclude that their canned tuna have no relationship with dizziness and nausea.

Finally, even all the recalled cans is healthy and don't pose a health risk, P still cannot say that their tuna is innocent, because maybe these eight million cans are healthy but those cans sold before is not. The part of consumers suffers from dizziness and nausea is because they have eaten the early cans but not those eight million cans. So that maybe these recalled cans is health, but the reason of dizziness and nausea is still related with P.

To sum up, P assumes that the canned tuna did not, after all, pose a health risk is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, P must provide more evidence.

lovetianUID：2899734

第四篇 A
Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.


In this argument, the arguer concludes that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of deer couldn't follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. To strengthen this conclusion, the arguer provides some reports from local hunter about the decline of deer’s' population. The arguer also give an explanation that global warming is the reason why these deer cannot follow the old migration patterns. At first glance, the argument might be somewhat reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that is contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

First of all, the argument claims that the populations of Arctic deer are declining as there is a report from local hunter to support. However, this might not be the case. Not having done any scientific research, local hunter's report is unbelievable because there are many other reasons to explain why these hunters feel the number of deer is decline, besides it really happens. For example, perhaps local deer have changed their habits and stay at somewhere hard to be found when local hunters are hunting, or perhaps these local hunters have been bought off by some environment firms who will get profit from hunters' report. Without ruling out such possibilities, I cannot accept the arguer's point of decrease in population of deer.

Even assuming that the report from local hunters is reliable and the populations of deer are really decreasing, the causal relationship between global warming and decrease does not be proved. The arguer observes a coincidence between the fact that global warming makes the sea ice melt and the reduction of the number of deer, and then concludes that global warming is the indirect cause to the reduction. However, there is no evidence to shows that global warming has an effect upon the deer living environment. Although the global climate is becoming warmer, maybe it is still not effective to change the deer’s' habitat, which is still cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands.
Without showing reliable relationship between these two things, the arguer cannot conclude that global warming is responsible for decline of the deer populations.

Finally, even I concede that the number of deer is decreasing and its reason is global warming, the arguer fails to consider possible differences between deer can't follow the old migration pattern and deer populations' decrease that might bring about a different result to the conclusion. For instance, maybe the old migration pattern cannot to be followed; young deer can also find a new one to replace it and it wouldn't contribute to the decrease. Additionally, the reason why deer populations are declining may be some other animals enter into the habitat of deer and destroy the environment balance. Without thinking about these alternatives, we cannot accept that the speaker's conclusion that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.

To sum up, the arguer’s conclusion about why deer populations has reduced is not well supported as it stand. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence, such as relationship between global warming and the change happened in deer’s habitat, and a believable report.

lovetianUID：2899734

第三篇 A
An ancient, traditional remedy for insomnia—the scent of lavender flowers—has now been proved effective. In a recent study, 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept each night for three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room where their sleep was monitored electronically. During the first week, volunteers continued to take their usual sleeping medication. They slept soundly but wakened feeling tired. At the beginning of the second week, the volunteers discontinued their sleeping medication. During that week, they slept less soundly than the previous week and felt even more tired. During the third week, the volunteers slept longer and more soundly than in the previous two weeks. Therefore, the study proves that lavender cures insomnia within a short period of time.

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.



In this argument, the arguer concludes that the traditional remedy for insomnia is effective. To strengthen this conclusion, the arguer provides a recent study about 30 volunteers who are tested by three kinds of methods to cure insomnia and he or she thinks that the consequence of experiment is positive. At the first glance, the study cited by the arguer might be somewhat reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

First of all, the study introduced in the argument is not a successful one; we can’t conclude that the reason why volunteers slept more soundly is the scent of lavender in the third weeks. Because these people have taken their usual sleeping medication for one week before, maybe the concentration of the medication come to an excellent time or perhaps these medications cure the insomnia within a short period of time so that the testees slept better in the third week. Without eliminating the influence of the medication, I cannot accept the arguer’s point of view that lavender can cure insomnia.

Second, even assuming that the influence of the medication they have taken before has absolutely disappeared, the experiment is still supposed to be unsuccessful because the arguer haven’t told us what have the volunteers done when they were tested in those three weeks. Maybe they are required to slept at the first two weeks so that they couldn’t slept soundly or feel tired after sleeping, which can easily understand by our common knowledge. And it is possible that the volunteers are asked to do exercise for a long time during the daytime in the third week; and because of this, people feel more tired than before so that they can sleep more soundly and longer. For that matter, we cannot achieve the answer that the pillows with the smell of lavender do cure the insomnia in these three weeks.

Finally, even I concede that the volunteers slept longer and more soundly than in the previous two weeks because their insomnia is cured by the scent of lavender, the number of study’s volunteers is too small so that the result of experiment is not credible. As a common knowledge, the reason why people suffer from insomnia is multitudinous, such as tension, physical illness, or mental illness, so that just test the therapy on 30 volunteers cannot come to the conclusion that this method is efficient. Besides that, even if the number of testees is enough, the experimenters intend to examine if the scent of lavender will cure insomnia, he or she should set two groups of people, one is group experimented on and the other is control. Without a rational experiment, we cannot accept the consequence of a study which serves as a proof.

To sum up, the arguer’s conclusion about efficiency of the traditional treatment to insomnia is not well supported as it stands. The author must develop the study so that it can be used as a proof to support the idea of author.

lovetianUID：2899734

第二篇 A
The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville.

All students should be required to take the driver's education course at Centerville High School. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centerville have involved teenage drivers. Since a number of parents in Centerville have complained that they are too busy to teach their teenagers to drive, some other instruction is necessary to ensure that these teenagers are safe drivers. Although there are two driving schools in Centerville, parents on a tight budget cannot afford to pay for driving instruction. Therefore an effective and mandatory program sponsored by the high school is the only solution to this serious problem."

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.


While it may be sure that all the students have duty to learn how to drive a car at Centerville High School (CHS), this author’s argument does not make a cogent case for the necessity of driver’s education course at CHS. It is easy to understand why students should learn how to drive before they become real drivers, but this argument if rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to additional courses.

Citing surveys of traffic accidents in and around Centerville, the author implies that most of the teenage drivers in the town of Centerville are poor in driving; however, it is not clear and even funny because a concrete connection between the level and the appearance of teenage drivers is not effectively made. Hardly can I accept that the arguer draw such a conclusion just speculation over several accidents but not a more professional research. As the argument indicates, some young drivers are involved in several accidents in the past two years, but the reason of these accidents may be bad weather, poor condition of road, mechanical breakdown, or other objective factors. Without getting a clear picture of these traffic accidents, the author cannot reach the sub conclusion that the students in Centerville need to accept the driver's education course.

Additionally, the author hold the view that those teenage drivers in the accidents could do nothing, despite they haven't systematically learn how to drive, because their parents have no time to teach them or their families cannot afford the bill of driver's education course in the two driving schools. There are several ways to resolve these two problems: the students whose parents are too busy to teach their children to drive can pay for driver's education course and the students whose families are on a tight budget can earn money by doing part-time jobs, which are better than the author's project. To strengthen his or her argument, the author would benefit from enumerating more benefits of his/her proposal than other possible solutions.

Even I concede that the students in Centerville are not safe drivers and we can do nothing but carry out the program that all the students are ordered to take driver's education course, the expense shouldn't be stood only by CHS. The bill of courses will be a huge cost which is hard to bear so it is unfair to CHS. As we all know, traffic safety, especially road safety, is a significant factor to define whether a city is a nice place for people to live so that the government of the town of Centerville should be responsible to this program. Consequently, if this program would be implemented by CHS, the government or some special instruction should pick up the tap. Regardless of whether the proposal will be carrying out, the author haven't thought comprehensively about the question of who would pay the piper.

Road safety often adds to a city's property values, leads to a high level of happiness and a better overall quality of life for residents. For these reasons, we should try to promote traffic safety so that we can live a better life. However, the author's argument is not likely successfully help the town government to achieve the target.

lovetianUID：2899734

第一篇 A

The following was written by a group of developers in the city of Monroe.

A jazz music club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise. At present, the nearest jazz club is over 60 miles away from Monroe; thus, our proposed club, the C Note, would have the local market all to itself. In addition, there is ample evidence of the popularity of jazz in Monroe: over 100,000 people attended Monroe's jazz festival last summer, several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe, and the highest-rated radio program in Monroe is 'Jazz Nightly.' Finally, a nationwide study indicates that the typical jazz fan spends close to $1,000 per year on jazz entertainment. We therefore predict that the C Note cannot help but make money."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.



In this argument, the arguer recommends that we should set up a new jazz club named C Note(C) in Monroe (M) because she predicts that the C will make money without doubt. To strengthen this recommendation, she cites several examples, such as the nearest jazz club is 60 miles away from M, some famous jazz musicians live in M; the speaker also shows a statistic from a nationwide study about the cost of a typical jazz fan spent in a year. Seemingly, this argument is somewhat persuasive; in fact, it provides little credible support for the profitability of this proposal.

First of all, hardly can we accept the auger's claim that the C club would own the local market all to itself just because there is no jazz club whose distance between M is less than 60 miles. As the argument indicates, the jazz fans living in M went to the jazz club over 60 miles away from M in the past and maybe the club is a high quality club with the most skillful DJs and excellent instruments. Except that, even the club away from M is not better than the C club, we still couldn't come to a conclusion like that. As we all know, human being is a kind of animal with habitual behavior so that there will be someone used to go to other clubs even they are far away from their homes. So, without any convincing proof, the arguer cannot draw a conclusion that the C club will have the local market all to itself.

Even I concede that the new club will get the local market all to itself, it still couldn't arrive at this that the new club will surely make money. The argument claims that jazz is popular in M by three examples; however, this might not be the case. For instance, perhaps over 90 percent of the people who attended M's jazz festival last summer don't live in M and these people live far away from M, even in other countries; perhaps those celebrated jazz musicians choose M to live only because M is a peaceful city and they don't want to play jazz any more. To support the popularity of jazz in M, the last fact is also weak. We don't have any idea about the number of programs when the "Jazz Nightly" begins; maybe there is only one program, "Jazz Nightly". Unless the arguer can convince me that all these possibilities are unlikely, I cannot accept the point of view that jazz is very popular in M.

Finally, even assuming that the new club will get the local market all to itself and jazz is popular in M, the nationwide study about the cost of a jazz fan spent on jazz entertainment may be fake. Even if the nationwide study is credible, the people live in M may not spend too much on jazz entertainment. Even they spend as much money on jazz as the people in nationwide study; this money wouldn't all be used to pay for jazz club expenses.

To sum up, there are not enough potent evidences to prove "the C club cannot help but make money", for this reason, the arguer have to account for more persuasive proves in order to convince us that the C club will profit to a fraction.

lovetianUID：2899734

第八篇 I
Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.



I totally disagree with the author's claim that government should fund only for those researches whose consequences are clear. In terms of the essence of research or the reason why should government have a clear picture of research, the argument is unreasonable and absurd. Although a few researches' results have brought some calamities to our human beings, it is just the problem in the way of using scientific technology, scientific research itself is innocent.

To begin with, taking the result of research is clear or not as a factor to determine if government should fund for is a terrible idea. No one can prove that the investment to any research whose consequence is unclear has no value. We must notice that the essence of scientific research is such a process in which scientists use a logical and systematic way to search for new and unknown information on a particular topic. The invention of Penicillin is such an example that nobody includes Alexander Fleming himself knows what he will find by his experiment on bacteriology, not to mention, no one can predict that the result of this research is such a great one, which almost change the whole world and let millions of people away from death. As scientists are search in an undiscovered field, we have no reason to ask them tell us what they will find in the end.

Second, maybe the reason why the author suggests that government should not fund for unclear research is he/she holds the view that investing in some researches which turn to a failure is a waste of money. However, no matter what an experiment's result is, success or failure, it still has value to let government invests in it. For instance, the contrivance of airplane has experienced countless failures until the Wright brothers successfully made the first propeller plane. Although there are so many unsuccessful experiments before the Wright brothers, the huge amount of money government has invested in these failed researches is still desirable, because all these failures do lead to the final success.

Finally, it is true that government will fund for some researches whose consequence may cause a calamity to the public without inspecting the research in advance. However, a kind of supervision system can be set up instead of simply holding such recommendation. Government can let someone to supervise and estimate the process of the research they funding for, and through this way, we can successfully avoid the calamity brought by scientific research. Besides, most of calamities made by science are not because the research is harmful to us, but the methods we use might make these disasters happen. If we can use the result of scientific research in some right ways, our society will benefit from it a lot and those unpleasant things will not come true.

In sum up, recommendation made by the author is somewhat irrational; if the government adopt such advice, it is possible that no new discovery will be made. So that, we shouldn’t choose which research to be invested in just by if the research’s consequence is clear or not.

lovetianUID：2899734

第七篇 I
Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition.

Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.

Different with the speaker’s claim, I hold the view that government should try to make every admitted students have opportunity to receive university education but not free of charge. Government or universities can offer some methods to these students, and through this way, students can afford the expense of obtaining education by themselves.

For the reason that university education will give benefits to the society, I suppose that every admitted student should have access to go into the classroom of a university. Since the students are admitted by a university, he/she must be qualified to be educated in the university. Achieving education, getting the degree, and with the knowledge from university, the student can contribute to the society a lot. For example, a qualified doctor with bachelor degree or master degree will help to treat other people who suffer from diseases. Besides that, with the development of society, if a person wants to enjoy a high quality of life, with a pleasant salary, a bright house, and a beautiful car, a college education is increasingly a prerequisite for all of this.


However, the expense of receiving education shouldn’t be borne by the government because this is a very heavy burden to the government. Students should pay the bills by themselves. If government offer a free university education to these students, it will be unfair to those students whose families can afford the burden of education. Every admitted student is equal to others, government shouldn't divide them into two groups just by evaluating their families financial condition and let one group of students accept the education free of charge. Those students can make effort to get the scholarship by their outstanding ability, like high academic performance.

Students who cannot pay for the expense of education can also apply for loan or take time to work. Different from offer free education to the student, I suppose that government can provide some kind of no-interest loan program to students and this is good for them. By applying this kind of loan, students can easily afford their tuitions and they will have to work hard when they are studying in the university. According to a report conducted by Social Department of Fudan University, these students who apply the loan pay more attention on study, they averagely spend over 90 hours on learning, and more than 80 percent of the students who have the experience of bearing the pressure of loan have a beautiful life when they graduate from college.

In sum, considering the benefits contributed from college students, I think that government should let every admitted students accept the university education. But, government shouldn’t offer the opportunity to them without any charge.