argument220-[spring 小组] 第六次作业

luckimonkeyUID: 2408088

Argument 220  The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers. "A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media."
WORDS :521  TIME: 45 minutes   DATE: 2007-12-1

The assertion comes to the conclusion that the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to gain less profitability compared with the television industry, and then suggests people willing to be writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television, based on a study which shows the fact that people makes an average of 23 references to television and only 1 reference to reading fiction in describing a typical day’s conversation. The assertion appears to be cogent at  first glance, however, it fails to persuade me for it suffers from many logical fallacies.
  To begin with, the study the assertion cites to substantiate its conclusion is open to question. As one form of literature, fiction can not stand for all of the print media. We have masses of print media, such as newspaper, magazine and other kinds of books except fiction. Thus, more investigations need to be taken to cover other forms of print media except fiction.

   Second, the result of the study lends little support to the arguer’s assessment of the profitability of the publishing and bookselling industries , because lots of factors contributes to the more number of times people making references to watching television .As is known to us all, compared to paper media, television provide a variety of programs such as news, TV plays, entertainment shows, and so forth, all of which are closely related to our daily life and more likely to be mentioned during a conversation. Also, the TV program can be watched simultaneously by many people, while reading is a comparatively personal activity. It is more possible for people to choose the common-known information as references instead of those others will be unfamiliar with. Therefore, unless other factors are eliminated, I am not convinced that the only or major cause of the result shown in the study is the decline in the number of consumers of the print media.

     Third, even the study suggests a decline in profitability of publishing and bookselling industries; it does not certainly mean the increment of profitability of television industry. Television centers gain profit through many ways, like advertising, besides charging from the audiences. No investigation is taken to prove and foretell the increase in profitability of the television industry.

     Last but not the least, the suggestion the assertion gives to those wishing to have careers as writers is unwarranted. The assertion arbitrarily assumes that the reason why people choosing to have careers as writers is about the good incomes of writers, while ignoring other reasons such as a strong craving and innate gift. What’s more, the suggestion given in the assertion is totally based on the illogical assumption that television industry has greater profit than the publishing and bookselling industries.

   To sum up, the assertion is logically unsound because of the unpersuasive study, illogical assumption and unwarranted suggestion. To strength, it need to provide more information to show that the result shown in the study prove the author’s assessment of the profitability in the two distinct industries; also, more investigations need to be taken about the purpose of those willing to be writers before offering a suggestion.



[ 本帖最后由 luckimonkey 于 2007-12-1 21:46 编辑 ]

hongdanUID: 2228730

基本逻辑错误都已找出，比我写得好很多，很值得学习。
我觉得不足的就是观点没展开，我的文章也是展不开。可以再多看看范文吧

life2008UID: 2401740

The assertion comes to the conclusion that the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to gain less profitability compared with the television industry, and then suggests people willing to be writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television, based on a study which shows the fact that people makes an average of 23 references to television and only 1 reference to reading fiction in describing a typical day’s conversation. The assertion appears to be cogent at  first glance, however, it fails to persuade me for it suffers from many logical fallacies.
  To begin with, the study that the assertion cites to substantiate its conclusion is open to question. As one form of literature, fiction can not stand for all of the print media. We have masses of print media, such as newspaper, magazine and other kinds of books except fiction. Thus, more investigations are need to be taken to cover other forms of print media except fiction.
   Second, the result of the study lends little support to the arguer’s assessment of the profitability of the publishing and bookselling industries , because lots of factors contributes to the more times people making references to watching television .As is known to us all, compared to print media, television provides a variety of programs such as news, TV plays, entertainment shows, and so forth, all of which are closely related to our daily life and more likely to be mentioned during a conversation. Also, the TV program can be watched simultaneously by many people, while reading is a comparatively personal activity. It is more possible for people to choose the common-known information as references instead of those others will be unfamiliar with. Therefore, unless other factors are eliminated, I am not convinced that the only or major cause of the result shown in the study is the decline in the number of consumers of the print media.
     Third, even the study suggests a decline in profitability of publishing and bookselling industries; it does not certainly mean the increment of profitability of television industry. Television centers gain profit through many ways, like advertising, besides charging from the audiences. No investigation is taken to prove and foretell the increase in profitability of the television industry.
     Last but not the least, the suggestion the assertion gives to those wishing to have careers as writers is unwarranted. The assertion arbitrarily assumes that the reason why people choosing to have careers as writers is about the good incomes of writers, (这个好像从文中给出的信息挖掘不出来吧,本文的前提我觉得好像就是没有证据说电视盈利,而平面媒体亏损)while ignoring other reasons such as a strong craving and innate gift. What’s more, the suggestion given in the assertion is totally based on the illogical assumption that television industry has greater profit than the publishing and bookselling industries.
   To sum up, the assertion is logically unsound because of the unpersuasive study, illogical assumption and unwarranted suggestion. To strength(有这种表达吗?), imore information is needed to show that the result shown in the study proves the author’s assertion of the profitability in the two distinct industries; also, more investigations are need to be taken about the purpose of those willing to be writers before offering a suggestion.
小猴的argu写的真的很好,看了你的,觉得我看了这么长时间的ARGU,还是找不全逻辑错误,这篇文章的错误我觉得不是很好说,论据跟前提真是没有关系,叫人怎么写哦,不过看了你的,给了我思路,有空看看我的吧,很久没写了,磨了半天,才写出来,我的ARGU220
http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=786340&extra=page%3D1

[ 本帖最后由 life2008 于 2008-1-2 00:43 编辑 ]