【天下无G askme习作】第9次作业

askmeUID: 2264776

TOPIC: ISSUE214 - "Society should identify those children who have special talents and abilities and begin training them at an early age so that they can eventually excel in their areas of ability. Otherwise, these talents are likely to remain undeveloped."
WORDS: 645          TIME: 0:45:00          DATE: 2007-2-14
Because the future of our society hinges on quality of our children, people have place much more stress on the education and training of children. It, hence, often causes debates and most of them are over the issue: whether or not we should give special training to those children with special talents at an early age. In my opinion, we should give full education, including special training, values and other aspects, to all children, no matter whether they have special talents or not. However, it is also necessary to train some special children at an early age; otherwise, our education system will defeat its own purpose.
First of all, giving children full education is quite significant, because such kind of education is indispensable for both individuals and society. One reason for this is that some talents involves with other knowledge and fields. For supporting examples, one need look no further than Einstein. Proverbially, when Einstein was a child, he, showing a burning passion and talent for science, deserved the special training as a future excellent scientist. Yet, in his later life, as Einstein himself once said, the most important part for his discovering the theory of relativity is not the special knowledge on physics but inspiration caused by violin and philosophy. Were it not for knowledge other than science, perhaps his talents would never develop to the full. Another reason for this statement is that a full education is the base of prosperity of society. As a result of globalization and the development of science and technology, our society requires more generalists, who have a broader perspective. We need genius who not only have special and brilliant talents but also have other abilities, such as cooperation, interpersonal skills and critical thinking, all of these cannot be provided by certain kind of special training. In short, because of the requirement from both individuals and society, we should give every child a full education instead of some kind of special training.
However, our society should identify those children with special talents and abilities and give them both special and proper training in addition to a full education in order to give the full play to their talents. This statement brings immediately to minds Zhou Zhou, a Chinese child with special ability on music. Although Zhou Zhou was born with lower IQ than average, nothing could cover his excellent talents on music. Receiving some special training about music, he shifted from a poor boy towards an outstanding musician, having made lots of performances all over the world. Had nobody found his talent and given special training, his talent would be consigned to oblivion for good. In contrast, one with special talent receives improper training will destroy his future, let alone his talent. For example, In China, some students show a similar passion as Einstein on science, but what prepare for them is not a complete and systematic method of special training on science, but burden forcing them to purely memorize facts and principles of science for the purpose of winning Olympic Campaign on science for their country. In the end, few of these excellent children become scientists who are able to win Nobel Prize; on the contrary, most of them give up desire and passion for science, and even hate it. In a word, a proper training can bring about a genius; an improper training can also destroy a genius.
Finally, in future more and more children with special talents need special training. However, we might hear some people complaint that this will harm these children. This impartiality leads our minds astray. One question, therefore, that need to be asked, is that whether this training is helpful for our society. If none give them special training, how could they become specialists accommodating to the more and more complex society.
TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.
"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
WORDS: 550          TIME: 0:29:10          DATE: 2007-2-14
Giving some facts and analysis, the argument that Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of their employees to take the Easy Read seems logical. However, a careful examination of this argument will reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
First of all, the arguer assumes that Acme Publish Company is analogous to other companies which benefit from Easy Read. However, this is not the case, nor does the arguer provide any evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. Perhaps, other companies' major service and word is about words and if so, they will obviously benefit from Easy Read. For example, after a newspaper company sent its employees to Easy Read, they are able to read and check much more articles than ever before and thus boost the efficiency of this company. In short, without ruling out such possibility, the conclusion is highly unconvincing.
Furthermore, aside from attending Easy Read, it is possible that other factors are instead for graduate rising to vice president in under a year. Such alternatives might include that this graduate is excellent in management or that the former vice president has just left and the company required a person to substitute. For example, if this graduate is the only person in this company graduating from Harvard Business College and he show sophisticated knowledge and experience in both practice and theory, the boss of this company will of course give much attention and thus a promotion to him. What's more, it is equally possible that abrupt leaving of the former vice president renders the company in hurry and the graduate substitutes as expediency. As a result, any of these scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine this conclusion.
In addition, although the arguer claims that 500 dollars appears to be a small amount of money, it is still huge money for a nascent company. As common sense and experience tells us that we should weigh revenue against expense.
If fees of such training take up more than half of the company revenue, it is not wise to waste money on it. On the contrary, this money could be better spent both on advertisement and on well-being of employees, all of these will enhance the influence and morale of this company and thus increase the efficiency. Accordingly, without ruling out these possibilities, the arguer cannot confidently draw any firm conclusion.
Finally, even if Easy Read can actually increase our speed to read, it does not follow that people who attend the training can absorb more information. It is possible that someone earns his or her living by carrying heavy goods or building houses. If so, then the amount of information he or she absorbs will remain the same. Even if a teacher or a professor attend Easy Read and read faster than ever before, is he or she able to remember and gain an insight into what he or she reads? Lacking such evidence, the arguer's conclusion is premature at best.
To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited here lends no strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen this argument, the arguer should provide more evidence concerning whether Easy Read is suitable for Acme. To better evaluate this argument, we need more information regarding the effect of attending Easy Read.