argument36 @_@

imongUID: 140258

In the first place, the arguer commits a fallacy of cause of over-simplification.（first of all, the fact that tertia children talk more about their biological parents does not necessarily suggest that they are reared by them rather than the community as a whole.） In this statement, the arguer mentions that the children living in the several islands including Tertia always talk about their parents so the arguer concludes that the D’s observation is false that these children are not reared by their biological parents. However, does children always talk about their parents（biological不能省略） means that they are raised by their parents? It might be that these children are raised by other adults so that they miss their parents and wish to see their parents so much; hence, they often talk about their parents. It is also possible that just because these children are raised by other adults not by there biological parents, these adults ask them to talk about their parents frequently for the sake that they will not lose the close relationship between children and parents.攻击文字组织的并不是很有力。上次我写那个I we you的实验报告的时候naiba就说 例子部分和论证部分应当分开看 到这里其实也一样 They have to tell their biological parent from other adults. 单纯为了区分造成的频率差异和因为rearing tradition造成的差异 不同的。

In the second place, the arguer makes a generalization that for the reason Dr.’s observation about Teria is mistake（mistake是名词。这句话动词到底是make还是is？）, admitted that the observation is somewhat inaccurate, but there is no evidence shows that the observation-centered approach by Dr. is false.（混乱的句子） The observation is only one factor of the approach by Dr, and people could not draw a conclusion that the approach is false so simple just because of one mistake aspect. It is possible that if Dr. adjust the observation such as observing selected individual families to watch whether their children are raised by entire village or observing the leaders of the village to see whether this phenomenon is true, the observation-centered approach will be effective. 驳得不是很到位? 暂且no idea中...或者 干脆证明 正是因为interview-centered才导致了biased conclusion?

What is more, the arguer makes such assumption because he or she thinks that using the interview-centered method will get the accurate understanding. However, the arguer provides no evidence to prove his or her method. People even only know little about this method（别扭啊，even后面习惯就nothing了 如果用little就不要用even）. Does people should（两个动词啦。） and have to use this interview-centered method? What about if the some people propose the picture-centered method to picture all the life of these children or record-centered method to record the life of these children using the video cameras? And these methods also could contribute to a good understanding of the child-rearing traditions.

语言上基本错误要纠掉。关于论证还是看看我写得3篇文章吧。

jorgeUID: 108878

最初由 dragonflylj 发布
[B]emm...终于看懂你的in the second 那个长长的句子想表达的东西了。我想，像我下面这样写也许好些：
In the second place, the arguer makes a generalization that for the reason Dr.F's observation about Teria is mistaken, his observation-centered approach is invalid, which there is no direct and clear evidence to draw hastily, admitted that the observation is somewhat inaccurate.[/B]

en thx 。写的时候太急了。

In the second place, the speaker makes a generalization that for the reason D's observation about T is fallacious, admitted that the observation is somewhat inaccurate, hence,  his observation-centered approach is invalid. However, there is no evidence show that the approach of D is false.

jorgeUID: 108878

蒙蒙的哪三篇文章?

poohUID: 146994

如果时间太紧了，就去买本猴哥的作文书看看，只看argu部分，看它的提纲，issue部分没什么价值

jorgeUID: 108878

最初由 pooh 发布
[B]如果时间太紧了，就去买本猴哥的作文书看看，只看argu部分，看它的提纲，issue部分没什么价值 [/B]

:D  偶3.3 考试.现在还没多少准备. 一跑出去,就又少一天了。

:(

jorgeUID: 108878

发现自己的格式居然错了。 见谅。:)