ISSUE+Argument练习|||招人加入互改

maggiexiaUID: 3403087

一直看到有朋友在发帖子求批改，可是都没有人回复。我自己的作文也写不好，也希望能够和大家一起努力。所以我就号召一下咯：如果有愿意互改的，就回复一下本帖，我们建个小组坚持互批。预计小组4人。大家考G顺利！



今天的习作：
Issue：
Some people say that corporations should have a responsibility to promote the well-being of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible.


While the commitment of promoting the overall welfare of their surrounding communities may be a big plus for corporations, it should not become a compelling requirement to all of them. What’s more, social responsibility cannot be tantamount to altruism; on the contrary, performing social responsibility should not be narrowed down to mere devotion or donation. When a company behaves itself and successfully maintains the financial safety and continuity, it presents a sense of social responsibility.

When hundreds of small business bankrupt every day, we may not urge extensive devotion and support to a broader community from these endangered ones. In fact, for them, supporting their own employees and providing them with high pay is their version of implementing social responsibility. When a company stands on the verge of bankrupting, the most seriously influenced ones are those employees: once the company bankrupts, no position can be offered and following the unemployment come problems that may threaten the community. Some who fail to afford the rent of their houses may become errant and those who cannot tolerant the transition from a regular working life may suffer from mental inadaptation and disorder. And these results, if not controlled properly, may become big threats to the community and disturb the once harmonious and quiet life. Thus, if the company failed to guarantee its financial safety and continuity, the result may also result in chaos. Therefore, to promise the financial safety of a corporation is not only for the profits, but also for the merits of the neighborhood.

Beyond that, corporations, even though they are not precarious, can choose to present social responsibilities in a number of ways except for participation in the local community affairs. For example, if a healthy food company successfully advocate the healthy theories and promote the healthy lifestyles through their products, although that is only a marketing strategy to build the image of the company, the public can also benefit from such strategy: these advocates may engrave on people’s mind and change their everyday life stealthily. What's more, companies should also be eulogized if they support the local industries by purchasing ingredients from them. By taking these industries into a streamline of production, the companies offer a chance for the local farmland to thrive and local farmers to participate in the market economy. The cost they pay for the farmers and industrial workers can support the inhabitants both financially and socially, for being an actor in a market not produces a sense of financial independence, but also a sense of belonging and participation.

However, it is not surprising for people to urge private sectors to bear a responsibility to promote the wellbeing of the society and environments. Nowadays, the majority of the environmental pollution and destruction can be derived from the irresponsible private companies. Thus, it is considerable for people to ask them to atone for the danger which is caused by them. At the same time, some production itself will introduce disturbance to the local community, like the noise made during the production,. It is these companies that lead some communities to chaos and disturbance. Their production can also attract some dangerous people into the neighborhood, threatening the safety and peace of nearby inhabitants. In this respect, they ought to cure those diseases brought in by themselves. But atonement should not go beyond the capability of the company. If they are not ready for an extra service for the community, they should be allowed to organize their own business first, trying to control its baneful effect on the neighborhood.

In sum, since it is not realistic to require people perform altruism, it may not be a reasonable idea to ask every company to promote the overall welfare. For a company, the very beginning of social responsibility sets in the ability of self support; as for extra participation and devotion, it should be a compelling promise but not an immediate requirement.

flearUID: 2533174

只看了第一段
语言功底不错  
compelling requirement-> compulsive
第一句把你的立场交代清楚了 第二句

就让人无法理解 从何而来 跟题目有何关系？ 按照你的意思 应该是想说公司的存在和正常运作本身已经是对社会responsible了 一定先把这个交代了 你的What’s more, social responsibility cannot be tantamount to altruism; on the contrary, performing social responsibility should not be narrowed down to mere devotion or donation这一句 是论证的一部分 但是你在没有交代论点的情况下就先写出来了

还有这题跟altruism没关系 对社会和环境的responsibility 不等于altruism. 不要混淆

709591949UID: 2732831

我想加入 人少的正好可以相互激励

窦小凡UID: 3465641

楼主，怎么加啊，我想加入