Argument51 Issue130 【7\8\9\10】作文小组 第一次作业

DemiquaverUID: 203651

感谢拍我文章的战友，你们受苦了！

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - The following appeared in a medical newsletter.

"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

According to a medical newsletter, the writer advises patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain ought to take antibiotics as part of their treatment, because the antibiotics prevent patients from secondary infections, which may keep some of them from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. As far as I think, since taking medicine is to treat a certain illness, the advice for all patients seems to be perfunctory. Moreover, the hypothesis is also flawed in two aspects.

To begin with, even though assuming that the hypothesis is correct, which means the secondary infections may decelerate the speed of recovering from severe muscle strain, I doubt that whether all the patients who suffer from muscle strain will get secondary infections or taking antibiotics is appropriate for them. Since medicine is used with pertinence to treat certain illness, if a patient hardly gets secondary infections, why should he take antibiotics? As we all know, medicine has side effects, is it necessary for a patient to run the risk of harming his healthy to defend such a possibly-infected illness. Moreover, the writer does not consider, at least doesn’t present in the letter, that how to deal with the patients who are sensitive to antibiotics. Thus, such advice to take antibiotics as part of treating severe muscle strain for all patients is hasty.

Furthermore, under close scrutiny, I find the hypothesis is proved unconvincingly, mainly in two aspects. First, the study of two groups of patients is to prove that the secondary infections' influence on the speed of recovering from severe muscle strain. However, in the presentation of the study, I cannot find any descriptions about whether the two groups of patients had any access to get secondary infections, especially the second group. If both the two groups of people don’t get the infections at all during the study, the recuperation time of the first group of people, which was 40 percent quicker than typically expected, may depend on other reasons.

Second, the writer fails to provide us any information about people who involved in the study, which may critically influence the result of the study. For example, are the two groups of people in same age? Perhaps the first group of people are young in age, while most of the second group of people are elders. Naturally, youngsters heal more quickly from illness and pains than elders. Moreover, different doctors possess respective professional experience may also lead the results of treatments into difference. Generally, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine is much more experienced in treating muscle strains than a general physician. This may cause a quicker recuperation time of the first group of people as well.

In sum, such an advice of taking antibiotics as part of treatment for all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain is cursory. At least, the writer should consider the side-effect of antibiotics and the patient who cannot take such medicine. Moreover, the writer ought to provide more convincing evidence in the study to testify the hypothesis.

——————————————————————————我是分割线—————————————————————————————————

TOPIC: ISSUE130 - "How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."


It is broadly believed that children are the future of our society; therefore how they are socialized today is so critical. Lots of socialists and educationalists are taking effort to find a way to raise children who can creative a better society, yet it is not easy to come to a desirable solution.

Socialization is important because it sets the ground work for all future life. Socialization is a process that people who live with others learn to pattern their behavior and adapt it to the ways of acting that are considered is appropriate to that society in which they live. As children are the group of people who maintain intense curiosity on everything, they can be influenced by any attitude of social value, which will probably be held all life long. Although children will be favored who possess tolerance of opposite opinions, respect for individual rights and cooperation with others, those who live in a society of turbulence merits to pay more attention to. For instance, in some African country, civil war remains a main topic of the society. Growing up with the war, what the children there learn is using guns to revenge for his dead family members. They seem like born to be a soldier and combat his opponents. We cannot find any indication that civil wars in such society will come to an end in the near future, for the children there are so encouraged in following their destiny. Avoiding such circumstance, many other societies pay much attention to raise children in a way they believe can help bring about a better society.

However, such way is too intricate for all societies to find out as a perfect one. Both parents and societies are bogged in dilemma of how to raise a child who can grow up in a right direction we expect. On one hand, each parent is clearly convinced of the more opportunities to communicate with others and join group activities, the better their child will behavior in the society, after all no one expects his child to be a talking and dealing cripple with others. On the other hand, parents hold special censorship in their minds of who his children is not allowed to hang out with, and where is not allowed to go. Although the reason is clear that no one want their kid to make friends with those who are regarded as trouble maker, to be fair, they need friends and good models. Yet, the whole society is still inability in solving the problem.

Moreover, it is under arguable that which kind of socialization method we should take to raise our children, positive one which is based on pleasurable and exciting experiences or negative one which means using punishment, harsh criticisms or anger to try to “teach them a lesson”? Some are holding the belief that positive social learning experiences make children optimism when meeting frustration, while others consider that negative socialization can prepare children to be ready to endure torture and hardship. Children are so helpless that schools may teach them in this way, at same time, parents may instruct them in other way.

In conclusion, since children’s socialization plays an important role in the development of society, raising children whom we expect will bring us a better society is a big project. We are still struggling for the project and trying to find the balance in every ambiguous proposition.

[ 本帖最后由 Demiquaver 于 2008-7-21 23:17 编辑 ]

zoubinUID: 2501151

According to a medical newsletter, the writer advises patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain ought to take antibiotics as part of their treatment, because the antibiotics prevent patients from secondary infections, which may keep some of them from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. As far as I think, since taking medicine is to treat a certain illness, the advice for all patients seems to be perfunctory (这两者之间是因果关系吗？). Moreover, the hypothesis (what hypothesis?) is also flawed in two aspects.

To begin with, even though assuming that the hypothesis is correct, which means the secondary infections may decelerate the speed of recovering from severe muscle strain, I doubt that whether all the patients who suffer from muscle strain will get secondary infections or taking antibiotics is appropriate for them. Since medicine is used with pertinence to treat certain illness, if a patient hardly gets secondary infections, why should he take antibiotics? As we all know, medicine has side effects, is it necessary for a patient to run the risk of harming his healthy to defend such a possibly-infected illness. Moreover, the writer does not consider, at least doesn’t present in the letter, that how to deal with the patients who are sensitive (allergic) to antibiotics. Thus, such advice to take antibiotics as part of treating severe muscle strain for all patients is hasty.

Furthermore, under close scrutiny, I find the hypothesis is proved unconvincingly, mainly in two aspects. First, the study of two groups of patients is to prove that the secondary infections' influence on the speed of recovering from severe muscle strain (是完整的句子吗？所有格不合适). However, in the presentation of the study, I cannot find any descriptions about whether the two groups of patients had any access to get secondary infections, especially the second group. If both the two groups of people don’t get the infections at all during the study, the recuperation time of the first group of people, which was 40 percent quicker than typically expected, may depend on other reasons.

Second, the writer fails to provide us any information about people who involved in the study, which may critically influence the result of the study. For example, are the two groups of people in same age? Perhaps the first group of people are young in age, while most of the second group of people are elders. Naturally, youngsters heal more quickly from illness and pains than elders. Moreover, different doctors possess respective professional experience may also lead the results of treatments into difference. Generally, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine is much more experienced in treating muscle strains than a general physician. This may cause a quicker recuperation time of the first group of people as well.

In sum, such an advice of taking antibiotics as part of treatment for all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain is cursory. At least, the writer should consider the side-effect of antibiotics and the patient who cannot take such medicine. Moreover, the writer ought to provide more convincing evidence in the study to testify the hypothesis.

问题都找到了，但却条理，让人看得费劲，结构安排欠妥。论证的3段中，第1段放最后更合理。首先推前提，其次哪怕前提成立，也……。

[ 本帖最后由 zoubin 于 2008-7-22 15:22 编辑 ]

ciludali21UID: 2173816

According to a medical newsletter, the writer advises patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain ought to take antibiotics as part of their treatment, because the antibiotics prevent patients from secondary infections, which may keep some of them from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. As far as I think(这句是不是从as far as I concerned变过来的呢？但是能不能这么创造性的用呢?我到google上去搜了，似乎是没有几个人这么用，小心起见，建议改用however,这样也避免了第一人称的出现。因为就我观察argument里面似乎不宜出现个人称谓～请参考), since taking medicine is to treat a certain illness, the advice for all patients seems to be perfunctory(这个词我没用过，不过看起来挺好，和premature可以互换). Moreover, the hypothesis is also flawed in two aspects.

To begin with, even though assuming that the hypothesis is correct, which means the secondary infections may decelerate the speed of recovering from severe muscle strain, I doubt （如果是我我会避免第一人称，改用it is doubtful ）that whether all the patients who suffer from muscle strain will get secondary infections or taking antibiotics is appropriate for them. Since medicine is used with pertinence to treat certain illness, if a patient hardly gets (我会用have no，看起来比较肯定，hardly gets比较口语化) secondary infections, why should he take antibiotics? As we all know（避免人称～我会用As it is common sense that）, medicine has side effects（副作用这个词用得好，难不成你是医学专业滴？）, is it necessary for a patient to run the risk of harming his healthy to defend such a possibly-infected illness. Moreover, the writer does not consider, at least doesn’t present in the letter, that how to deal with the patients who are sensitive（是不是allergic? 如果用sensitive就是药物很有效的意思了。偶学医的，这点请相信偶） to antibiotics. Thus, such advice to take antibiotics as part of treating severe muscle strain for all patients is hasty.

Furthermore, under close scrutiny, I find the hypothesis is proved unconvincingly, mainly in two aspects. First, the study of two groups of patients is to prove that the secondary infections' influence on the speed of recovering from severe muscle strain. However, in the presentation of the study, I cannot find any descriptions about whether the two groups of patients had any access to get secondary infections, especially the second group. If both the two groups of people don’t get the infections at all during the study, the recuperation time of the first group of people, which was 40 percent quicker than typically expected, may depend on （我会用have，比较简单，depend on能用于表示“依靠”别的原因吗。偶没用过，所以提出来看看～）other reasons.

Second, the writer fails to provide us any information about people who involved in the study, which may critically influence the result of the study. For example, are the two groups of people in same age? Perhaps the first group of people are young in age, while most of the second group of people are elders. Naturally, youngsters heal more quickly from illness and pains than elders. Moreover, different doctors possess respective professional experience may also lead the results of treatments into difference（may also lead to different treatments会不会通顺些呢？虽然这么写会比较俗，但是比倒置的用法可能好些，其实也可能是个人习惯问题～还请参考～）. Generally, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine is much more experienced in treating muscle strains than a general physician. This may cause a quicker recuperation time of the first group of people as well.

In sum, such an advice of taking antibiotics as part of treatment for all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain is cursory. At least, the writer should consider the side-effect of antibiotics and the patient who cannot take such medicine. Moreover, the writer ought to provide more convincing evidence in the study to testify the hypothesis.

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－
总体感觉，老兄你滴英文水平很高呀！很多句子都很顺很地道～
现在偶来吹一下毛求一下疵～
在批斗的过程中，您一开始在第一段里说这文章主要有两个问题，但是由于分段的原因看起来像有三个问题。建议可以把后两段攻击合二为一。
再就是逻辑，第一段主要攻击：即使假设成立也不是所有病人都需要用药。您这一段把问题放在最后了(hasty)，如果放在段首会更一面了然和清楚。我自己当时写时主要把重点放在“所有”上面。一是不是所有病人都会二次感染，也许只有严重者才有；二是所有病人中可能有人会过敏。
第二段，攻击是否存在二次感染。偶···私下里说下，其实抗生素可以预防二次感染，所以不一定非要出现症状了才用。但是文章并不是专给医学生写的，所以我认为这点也可以攻击。但是莫不如写第一组的病人好得比一般预计（注意，并没有写比第二组快，而是quicker than typically expected）快可能有别的许多原因，比如这个一般时间是不是指的严重病患啊?而第一组可能都是轻伤啊等等。（其实这点我当初写时也没注意到）
第三段，第二组病人可能老些或者怎么样，总之没有很快痊愈。这里说病人年纪有关我觉得很好。我自己当时写的是第二组并没有写明是什么病，有可能除了肌肉损伤还有其他合并病症，所以导致愈合慢～
总之呢～写得比我的强多了～～休息下～稍后看看您滴issue～

zoubinUID: 2501151

TOPIC: ISSUE130 - "How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."


It is broadly believed that children are the future of our society; therefore how they are socialized today is so critical. Lots of socialists and educationalists are taking effort to find a way to raise children who can creative a better society, yet it is not easy to come to a desirable solution.
开头观点倒是很明白，似乎就是有些短。尤其和论证段比。

Socialization is important because it sets the ground work for all future life. Socialization is a process that people who live with others learn to pattern their behavior and adapt it to the ways of acting that are considered is appropriate to that society in which they live. As children are the group of people who maintain intense curiosity on everything, they can be influenced by any attitude of social value, which will probably be held all life long. Although children will be favored who possess tolerance of opposite opinions, respect for individual rights and cooperation with others, those who live in a society of turbulence merits to pay more attention to. For instance, in some African country, civil war remains a main topic of the society. Growing up with the war, what the children there learn is using guns to revenge for his dead family members. They seem like born to be a soldier and combat his opponents. We cannot find any indication that civil wars in such society will come to an end in the near future, for the children there are so encouraged in following their destiny. Avoiding such circumstance, many other societies pay much attention to raise children in a way they believe can help bring about a better society.
我觉得重要性从正面说的话会更好，毕竟这是你支持的观点。


However, such way is too intricate for all societies to find out as a perfect one. Both parents and societies are bogged in dilemma of how to raise a child who can grow up in a right direction we expect. On the one hand, each parent is clearly convinced of the more opportunities to communicate with others and join group activities, the better their child will behavior in the society, after all no one expects his child to be a talking and dealing cripple with others. On the other hand, parents hold special censorship in their minds of who his children is not allowed to hang out with, and where is not allowed to go. Although the reason is clear that no one want their kid to make friends with those who are regarded as trouble maker, to be fair, they need friends and good models. Yet, the whole society is still inability in solving the problem.

Moreover, it is under arguable that which kind of socialization method we should take to raise our children, positive one which is based on pleasurable and exciting experiences or negative one which means using punishment, harsh criticisms or anger to try to “teach them a lesson”? Some are holding the belief that positive social learning experiences make children optimism when meeting frustration, while others consider that negative socialization can prepare children to be ready to endure torture and hardship. Children are so helpless that schools may teach them in this way, at same time, parents may instruct them in other way.

In conclusion, since children’s socialization plays an important role in the development of society, raising children whom we expect will bring us a better society is a big project. We are still struggling for the project and trying to find the balance in every ambiguous proposition.

你定义的社会化是什么？文章反映的是交往适应能力。而教育下一代应该范围更广，因此在论证我们目前教育下一代的方法还存在问题时不应局限于socialization。另外倒数2，3段其实说的有些雷同，就是不好平衡度的问题，不妨一段说理论一段举个例子。

DemiquaverUID: 203651

感谢二位。ciludali21改的好认真。
argu的混乱我自己也察觉到了，其实脑子里蛮清楚的，但就是表达不好，出来的文章就是混乱的。

ciludali21提到的一个问题也是我想到的，其实每个人都有可能二次感染的，医生在文中建议大家服用抗生素的原因可能就是预防而已。也就是说二次感染减慢恢复速度是有可能的，至少从文中我们不能得出结论，而服抗生素是否有用，就是我们要攻击的地方。

写的时候就是在想allergic这个词，好像远在天边，近在眼前，但就是想不出来。
好多词都是这样，严重妨碍了表达。没希望了，还有一个月不到，这方面很难提高了。

关于issue，我的定义的社会化就是learn to pattern their behavior and adapt it to the ways of acting that are considered is appropriate to that society in which they live第一段一开始就表达了呀。
我感觉就是因为教育下一代的范围太广太广了，我们不可能面面俱到，所有有侧重点的说啊。
不过话说回来，还是因为表达的原因，我的想法没有在这篇文章中彻底地阐述出来。

ciludali21UID: 2173816

嗨~偶来晚了~sorry啊~~
-------------------------------------------
TOPIC: ISSUE130 - "How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."


It is broadly believed that children are the future of our society; therefore how they are socialized today is so critical. Lots of socialists and educationalists are taking effort to find a way to raise children who can creative a better society, yet it is not easy to come to a desirable solution.

Socialization is important because it sets the ground work for all future life. Socialization is a process that people who live with others learn to pattern their behavior and adapt it to the ways of acting that are considered is appropriate to that society in which they live. As children are the group of people who maintain intense curiosity on everything, they can be influenced by any attitude of social value, which will probably be held all life long. Although children will be favored who possess tolerance of opposite opinions, respect for individual rights and cooperation with others, those who live in a society of turbulence merits to pay more attention to(说实话，这一长句偶没看懂······children will be favored who possess....这里应该从那里断句呢？总觉得favored 后面要加个什么词才好，比如from，不过暂时存疑，期待楼主滴翻译哈~). For instance, in some African country（复数~countries）, civil war remains a main topic of the society. Growing up with the war, what the children there learn is using guns to revenge for his dead family members. They seem like born to be a soldier and combat his opponents. We cannot find any indication that civil wars in such society will come to an end in the near future, for the children there are so encouraged in following their destiny. Avoiding such circumstance(这里的因果关系偶又没明白，是不是想说“为了避免这种情况”? 似乎不能直接这么用吧~感觉没有主语啊，“避免”也不是现在分词也不是状态~个人观点~请参考~如果有误还请无视~~ ), many other societies pay much attention to raise children in a way they believe can help bring about a better society.（这一段基本上讲了负面的社会化儿童，如果要点题的话是不是加一句“这样长大的儿童很大程度上决定了这个社会的今后情况”呢~说明这就是许多地区长期矛盾存在的根源之一~这样就证明了题目的第一论点，儿童的社会化决定了社会命运~至于现在结尾的一段话有影响上文气势之嫌~不如直接放到第三段开头去，直接往下论证现在还找不到好方法）

However, such way is too intricate for all societies to find out as a perfect one. Both parents and societies are bogged in dilemma of how to raise a child who can grow up in a right direction we expect. On one hand, each parent is clearly convinced of the more opportunities to communicate with others and join group activities, the better their child will behavior in the society, after all no one expects his child to be a talking and dealing cripple with others. On the other hand, parents hold special censorship in their minds of who his children is not allowed to hang out with, and where is not allowed to go. Although the reason is clear that no one want their kid （kids~）to make friends with those who are regarded as trouble maker, to be fair, they need friends and good models. Yet, the whole society is still inability in solving the problem（这个结语来得太快了~~感觉话还没说完呢）.

Moreover, it is under arguable that which kind of socialization method we should take to raise our children, （是不是这里加一个? 隔开下一句话比较好？不然句子太长了，断句不明显）positive one which is based on pleasurable and exciting experiences or negative one which means using punishment, harsh criticisms or anger to try to “teach them a lesson”? Some are holding the belief that positive social learning experiences make children optimism when meeting frustration, while others consider that negative socialization can prepare children to be ready to endure torture and hardship. Children are so helpless that schools may teach them in this way, at same time, parents may instruct them in other way.

In conclusion, since children’s socialization plays an important role in the development of society, raising children whom we expect will bring us a better society is a big project. We are still struggling for the project and trying to find the balance in every ambiguous proposition.

----------------------------------------------------------------

楼主的思想很有深度~欣赏~我自己也在往思想深度上面方向发展~不过呢，我现在觉得这样也许会有吃力不讨好之嫌~一般比较难在45分钟内把这么大的问题说清楚，我自己几次都花了1个多小时~~汗啊~~~如果能学会四两拨千斤就最好了，共勉哈