Argument127【Triple Week】第2次练习by david36355

david36355UID: 2603992

= =基本写吐。

TOPIC: ARGUMENT127 - The vice president for human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company's president.
"In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Internet use from their workstations. Employees who use the Internet from their workstations need to be identified and punished if we are to reduce the number of work hours spent on personal or recreational activities, such as shopping or playing games. By installing software to detect employees' Internet use on company computers, we can prevent employees from wasting time, foster a better work ethic at Climpson, and improve our overall profits."


The vice president posited a recommendation that it necessarily profits more for the Climpson Industries if they implement to monitor the employees` Internet use. However, the recommendation was full of flaws which couldn`t withstand closer scrutinies.
Primarily, the recommendation based on a principle which sounds directly conflicting with common sense. The principle suggests the firm to dam and scrutiny every single move the employee`s activities for the sake of more interest. But ironically, the recommendation violates the staff`s privacy and definitely proceeds against the law. In either situations that the staff are aware of the monitoring system or not, they are deprived of personal respect.

In the second place, there is no adequate evidence shows that the personal or recreational activities on the net would drag the benefit. The vice president equated working time with efficiency. The statistics according to the working efficiency was not given in the recommendation. If the effieciency was not obviously improved, even if the Climpson Industries succeeded in persuading the staff, eschewing the law, suffer a huge cost installing the set of implements and the employees` unpleasant atomsphere, the measures taken would not promise a soaring profit.
What`s more, if there is really an ethic problem midst the staff, I am not convinced that the measure of monitoring the Internet would solve the issue. We are not informed that the staff recreate themselves merely on the net. From traditional card games to cell phone or PSP games, even chatting with the coleague could be the office time killer. Had the ethic problem exist, the staff would try their every effort to get rid of work.
To sum up, the argument is weak on several grounds. To strengthen it the argument`s proponent must provide clear evidence that the recreational and personal use of internet is the only reason that lags the working efficiency. Moreover, the Climpson Industries must give sufficient evidence showing the actions will embrace a satisfying result.

mymuroUID: 2356228

TOPIC: ARGUMENT127 - The vice president for human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company's president.
"In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Internet use from their workstations. Employees who use the Internet from their workstations need to be identified and punished if we are to reduce the number of work hours spent on personal or recreational activities, such as shopping or playing games. By installing software to detect employees' Internet use on company computers, we can prevent employees from wasting time, foster a better work ethic at Climpson, and improve our overall profits."

The vice president posited a recommendation that it necessarily profits more for the Climpson Industries if they implement to monitor the employees` Internet use. However, the recommendation was full of flaws which couldn’t withstand closer scrutinizes.

Primarily, the recommendation (漏了is，都说了先在word改错嘛- -)based on a principle which sounds directly conflicting with common sense. The principle suggests the firm to dam and scrutiny every single move the employee’s activities for the sake of more interest. But ironically, the recommendation violates the staff’s privacy and definitely proceeds against the law. In either situations that the staff are aware of the monitoring system or not, they are deprived of personal respect.
感觉说人权法律不恰当，是找逻辑错误而已，如何不能推出结论，而不是讨论法律问题—issue才这样讲的- -！

In the second place, there is no adequate evidence shows that the personal or recreational activities on the net would drag the benefit. The vice president equated working time with efficiency. The statistics according to the working efficiency was not given in the recommendation. If the efficiency was not obviously improved, even if the Climpson Industries succeeded in persuading the staff, eschewing the law, suffer a huge cost installing the set of implements and the employees` unpleasant atmosphere, the measures taken would not promise a soaring profit.
感觉逻辑顺序有问题，题目是先提出ethic再提出profit的，可能跟下一段互换顺序较好

What’s more, if there is really an ethic problem midst the staff, I am（换第三人称it is吧，I显得比较主观） not convinced that the measure of monitoring the Internet would solve the issue. We are not informed that the staffs recreate themselves merely on the net. From traditional card games to cell phone（calling） or PSP games, even chatting with the colleague could be the office time killer. Had the ethic problem exist, the staff would try their every（MS去掉更流畅） effort to get rid of work.
个人认为TS有问题，先假设了有ethic problem，但ethic problem在topic里是用作结论的，直接说上网杜绝不了time-wasting problem，因为有其他娱乐方法更好。

To sum up, the argument is weak on several grounds. To strengthen it the argument’s proponent must provide clear evidence that the recreational and personal use of internet is the only reason that lags the working efficiency. Moreover, the Climpson Industries must give sufficient evidence showing the actions will embrace a satisfying result.
点评：应该好好学习一下如何分清前提和结论以及找逻辑错误，而且貌似没说internet有必要用于工作上。。。感觉不少地方前提结论反了
最后，怎么感觉用模板鸟。。。

附word版：

david36355UID: 2603992

2# mymuro

呵呵，非常感谢！
其实没有用模板，但是问题在于目前为止，所有有关于语言的积累都是来自翻了一天的老美范文，结果看上去真的太模板了……
逻辑问题实话说确实也混乱得不忍贴上来……

整个状况实在是……太囧了！所以想厚脸皮问几个不着边儿的小问题，能帮忙解答一下么……

1.关于整个逻辑问题，比如分清前提结论也好，攻击火力方向范围掌握也好，固然主要在于自己多参考范文、多自己思考。但是关于这些东西，应该从什么地方入手，向哪个方向思考，能够比较快地适应AW部分的写作思维呢？
2.语言部分诚如组长所言= =模板化问题已然明显了……那么打破模板化语言应该怎样入手呢？非模板化的优秀语言是什么样子的呢？


问题都太新手向了，因为至今为止都米看过几篇文章，只能临阵磨枪了……还望指点～多谢！

mymuroUID: 2356228

3# david36355

关键理清逻辑链，找结论比较容易（通常有therefore等词），前提就要稍微仔细分析
其实我不善于总结的- -！ 建议试试自己找逻辑链，然后跟别人的242题完整提纲对照一下吧
多试试应该会有感觉

优秀语言。。。这个我不懂装懂一下
多点wiki&google（搜英文的），毕竟别人写的才地道，看杂志如time或economist也行
把上面收集的多加修改成自己的
最后，写作时多点注意句式变换，永远不要对自己的句子满意

david36355UID: 2603992

4# mymuro

嗯，既然这样看来两周时间积淀还是很短的……总之多谢了！