急！只剩6天了，希望各位能帮我看一下（符中文提纲）万分感激！！

iceblood88UID: 2663367

恳请各位指教，在下感激不尽！！
TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 596
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2009-8-16 9:48:22
两者都很重要
It is a common sense that two parts are crucial to a ship. One is the compass which is aimed at indicating a correct direction, and the other one is the engine, which provides the sailing power. It is the similar relationship between the great individuals, as the spiritual core, who play the role of
"compass" and the groups, impelling the advancement of the process, who serve as the "engine".
一方面伟人很重要，举了三个人washington, martin luther king and bill gates
On one hand, it is out of question that great individuals made a significant contribution to the development of the society. Generally speaking, they own deep thought, long-term vision and inner impulse which are all key factors when handling some situations. History is replete with such examples. During the War of Independence of America, the situation of continent army is fairly terrible. Compared with the top navy, well-trained soldiers and advanced weapons of the Great Britain which was the most powerful authority in that period of time, they were almost short for everything, even the food supply. However, under the guide of the excellent leader Washington who has strong will, military talent and forceful faith, they finally won the war. Martin Luther King, the great advocator fighting for the equal rights for the blacks, is also another proper example. During the time of King, the blacks could not share many rights with the whites, even in the bus they were not allowed to sit in the same area with white person. Eventually, it is the movements for equality reminds the whites the importance of sharing the same rights and today we can see more and more individuals are playing an important role in the American society such as the basketball superstar O'Neal and Kobe and the newest president Obama. Moreover, Washington and King are not alone. Bill Gates, the founder of the computer empire Microsoft, created an epoch of PC. There cannot be too much emphasize on his contribution to the progress of information era. While their achievements are so outstanding that we usually overlook those groups behind them.
另一方面，伟人背后的群众也很重要，同样是上面三个人背后的群众
On the other hand, however, we should never understate those groups who are in the back of the shining individuals and who are as important as the great persons and who should be respected more. Let us return to what I have mentioned above. In the War of Independence, we can hardly imagine that how could Washington alone beat away the mighty army of the Great Britain. Though the soldiers of continent army seemed that they had never gained excellent training and they did not have the guns as advanced as their army, it was actually them who fought with the most powerful army and won the victory. It is the same situation with Martin Luther King and Bill Gates. Without the assistance of thousands and hundreds of populace, the dream that children with different color of skins can sit together and share the time with each other may not come true till mow. Meanwhile, as for Bill Gates, there are over 20 thousands engineers, managers and other members devoted themselves to supporting such a huge computer company. Besides, it is well-known that the developing of a complex soft always requires thousands of engineers to fulfill it. Furthermore, we should not ignore that it is Bill Gates and Paul, the two, established Microsoft.
总结，基本上是开头的改写
In sum, as what I have analyzed above, great individuals are the "compass" who leads the groups who serve as the "engine". On the contrary, without the impulse of "engine", we can hardly make a big progress. Hence, both of them are honorable, and both of them should be commemorated in history.


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

医生长期以来怀疑严重肌肉扭伤后的二次感染妨碍了一些患者迅速康复。这一假说现在被一项对两组患者的研究的初步结果所证实。第一组患者全部由专攻运动医学的Dr. Newland治疗肌肉损伤，他们在疗程中经常服用抗生素。他们的康复期平均比通常预期的快40％。第二组患者由综合医师Dr. Alton治疗，他们被给予糖丸，而患者相信他们在服用抗生素。他们的平均康复时间没有明显缩短。因此，任何被确诊为肌肉损伤的患者应被建议服用抗生素作为辅助治疗。WORDS: 469
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009-8-16 9:48:22
开头就是点出argu的结论
As we can see from the argument, the arguer comes to the conclusion that all patients suffered from muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment according to a study of two groups of patients. However, no evidence reveals that it constitutes a logical statement in support of the conclusion.
两组人有区别，年龄和体质
The first problem of the argument is that the arguer assumes that the study of the two groups of patients make any sense. Despite the entire possibility, there is no guarantee that it is necessary the case. No statistic show us the ages, jobs, genders about the two groups of patients. Firstly, Maybe people in the first group were all young individuals, while patients in the second group were much older, thus we can hardly figure out whether it is the function of the treatment that make a better contribution to the healing or the difference of the age of the two groups. Secondly, maybe the first group members were all men who exercise regularly, but they were a group of weak women in the second group. In such case, we cannot get the conclusion as the arguer claims. Lastly, the health situation of the two groups may be not the same. It is possible that patients in the first group are rather slighter than the second group. Unless the arguer offers further evidence to eliminate these and those explanations, it is of no reason to deliver the verdict on the assumption.
医生的医术有差别
The second blemish in the argument lies in the two doctors. It is much more possible that the ability of treating muscle strain is much different. Maybe Dr. Newland (N) was one of the most famous doctors in the world, while Dr. Alton (A) was poor in treating such disease, and in the process the methods they used were totally different. As a result, this difference that doctor was much crucial than the antibiotics may lead to the same result in the argument. Without ruling out these possibilities, it is reasonable to cast doubt on the assumption.
买这种药可能带来负面影响，甚至有人买不起
Last but not least, even if all the forgoing assumptions can be proved to be correct, the assumption that all patients with similar disease should take antibiotics as part of their treatment is still unwarranted. Chances are that some patients may be quite sensitive to the antibiotics, which means taking such antibiotics may bring other disease or pain to them. What's more, maybe the antibiotics were very expensive and not all of the patients can afford it. In short, adopting the suggestion of the arguer can be harmful rather than beneficial.

In sum, the conclusion lacks credibility, because it lacks cogent evidences to support the conclusion. If more elements as I have analyzed above can be taken into consideration, there will be a more thorough and logical acceptable argument.

再谢！！！！！！！！！！！