贴片今天限时写的argument144

happymichelleUID: 154082

144According to a poll of 200 charitable organizations, donations of money to nonprofit groups increased by nearly 25 percent last year, though not all charities gained equally. Religious groups gained the most (30 percent), followed by environmental groups (23 percent), whereas educational institutions experienced only a very small increase in donations (3 percent). This poll indicates that more people are willing and able to give money to charities but that funding for education is not a priority for most people. These differences in donation rates must result from the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions.

In this argument, the arguer draws the conclusion that few people are willing to give money to education according to the different increase percentage from a poll of 200 charitable organizations.  While this argument seems somewhat specific and plausible, close inspection would reveal it is fraught with vague, oversimplified and unwarranted claims in several respects.

In the first place, the arguer fails to convince us the total amount of funding for education is less than that for religious groups and environmental groups.  The mere data of increasing percentage for example, the 30 percent donation of religious groups, the 23 percent of environmental groups, and the 3 percent of education, do not represent the total amount of donation.  It is entirely possible that the basic amount funding for education is much more than any others, thus even having increased only by 3 percent, the total funding is still much higher than money donated to other groups.  If so, it is much more likely that people still donate to education as their first choice.  Unless the arguer could acknowledge and rule out other possibilities relevant to the donation of education, the conclusion that funding for education is not a priority for most people is quite open to doubt.

In addition, there is no evidence to demonstrate that more people are willing and able to give money to other charities rather than education.  Granted that the increase percent of donation in the religious and environmental groups do means the total funding for these two charities are higher than education, it does not necessarily follow that it is because more people care about and have the ability to give donations to charitable organizations.  As a matter of fact, there might be some wealthy people who donated a large amount of money which takes up almost half of the total amount of funding.  In this case, it is not more people but only some wealthy individuals that provide the funding for donation.  Or it may also be that the donation for environmental and religious are so small that it become compulsory task for the people in the nation, but the fact might be that people are reluctant to give donation to these two charities.  All in all, without knowing the true condition of donation and the real attitude towards it, the conclusion is groundless.

Last but not least, the mere conclusion is only based on a survey of 200 charitable organizations, since the arguer makes claims about the donation in general, the organization sampled should be representative.  Since there is no evidence to prove that people who want to donate to education all went to the organization included in the 200 sample, we have good reason to doubt the validity of the result from the poll.  In fact, it is much more likely that many people directly go to local schools to donate their funding rather than through the charitable organizations, which are not included in this survey.  If this is true, the total amount for donation for education might be enormously greater than donation for other groups.  Thus it is presumptuous for the arguer to make the conclusion.

To sum up, the argument is neither logically sound nor persuasive because evidence provided does not support what the arguer maintains.  To better bolster and strengthen it, the arguer would have to prove that the total amount of funding for education is indeed less than that of the other charitable organization.  Also, it must be established that the poll is effective and efficient enough to represent the real condition of people's attitudes.  Only with more convincing evidence, could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal.

flyingwindUID: 189320

限时写的!
的确好,赞一个先~~
呵呵,我注意到你的开篇段喜欢用"While this argument seems somewhat ......, close inspection would reveal it is fraught with ......claims in several respects"
结尾段也是喜欢用的孙远的模式:作者该怎么加强之才有说服力..
的确没有问题,也很流畅,可是要是ETS看到很多人都这样写就不好了.(你的确写的很不错!)

最后body3里面第1句话should be representative和Since there is no evidence to prove that people ..
之间缺少转承词.已经是2个小点了

happymichelleUID: 154082

多谢flyingwind
我像这样改可能会好些
Since the arguer makes claims about the donation in general, the organization sampled should be representative.  However, no evidence was found to confirm that people who want to donate to education all went to the organization included in the 200 samples,  thus we have good reason to doubt the validity of the result from the poll.

poohUID: 146994

请注意帖子格式。看id应该是老朋友了:)

ZHGsunnyUID: 185312

在精华区看到过你的文章，很喜欢你写的Argument。 我觉得你的文章每一点批得都很有说服力，很透。语言也很流畅。不过我还是有点看法的：
1：我觉得你的文章的开头和结尾的模板是不是太明显了？我记得你精华区的那篇用了复述式开头，这篇已经改了，挺好的，这样开头显得简洁而且可以给正文段节省时间。但是结尾好像还没有改，我想以你的语言功底完全可以总结出自己独特的结尾的模板的，期待着！
2：是不是每段正文段都要加总结句呢？如果其中一段不加，是不是让人觉得有变化性，比较新鲜呢？
另外，问一个也许不该问的问题，印象中你好像已经考完作文了吧？怎么？

happymichelleUID: 154082

to ZHGsunny:
谢谢你的意见，我觉得关于最后不写总结句是个不错的建议
哎~去年6g verbal成绩不理想，所以要再战今年的6G了
我知道自己不是牛人，所以要求倒是也不高，4.5就够了，不过ISSUE写得挺烂的，可能要靠ARG给提分了