argument200 求拍

longwaykingUID: 196798

200 The following is a letter to the editor of a news magazine.
"Clearly, the successful use of robots on missions to explore outer space in the past 20 years demonstrates that robots could be increasingly used to perform factory work more effectively, efficiently, and profitably than human factory workers. The use of robots in factories would offer several advantages. First, robots never get sick, so absenteeism would be reduced. Second, robots do not make mistakes, so factories would increase their output. Finally, the use of robots would also improve the morale of factory workers, since factory work can be so boring that many workers would be glad to shift to more interesting kinds of tasks."
－－正文－－
The letter concludes that the use of robots can perform factory work more effectively, efficiently and profitably than human in that the robots never get sick, do not make mistake and can improve the morale of factory workers. The author infers that the robots never absent from the work, increase the output and are helpful for the human workers. The letter seems sound, and gives the advantages of robots, but it contains several reasoning flaws.

First of all, the author presumptuously concludes that the use of robots in factory will bring reformation to factory due to the success of space explore by robots. But it is a false analog. The difference between space exploration and factory work is large. The successful use of robot in exploring outer space cannot demonstrate the efficient and profitable use in factory. The outer space exploration may focus on stability and security due to the hard-control in space. The cost may cause no problem. But the use of robots in factory may emphasis on the efficiency and low-energy cost in that the profit is the primary goal in factory. The author ignores the different purposes between them and makes the inconvincible conclusion.

Secondly, the letter concludes the robots can be efficient, effective and profitable. It bases on three reasons. First, the robots never reduce absenteeism because of ill-immune of robots. Indeed, the robots never get sick, but it cannot guarantee the absenteeism. The robots will have mechanical problems which also make them out of work. And the maintenance will take up the work time. Second, the author confirms that the output can increase because the robots never make mistakes. But it also cannot be proved, the output depends on several factors not only on the mistakes. The adjustment of robots when working or the cooperation between robots and human works will influent the output. The third one, the conclusion that the robots can improve the morale of workers is ridiculous. The use of robots will cause unemployment of human works. Even they can replace the boring and tedious work of human workers, the replaced ones should be trained to other work. It has no relationship between morale and robots. The reasoning shows that the author makes haste conclusion and neglects the surrounding factors when supporting his confirmation.

Thirdly, even if the three advantages are proved in factory, it is still far to say that the profit and efficiency can be achieved. As we know, the profit of factory can be affected by many factors. The prices, the markets and other factor can be decisive. Only the three advantages of robots cannot ensure the profit.

In sum, the author suffers false analog when inferring usefulness of robots in factory. And he makes haste conclusion when bolstering his conclusion. To convince me, he should prove conditions or decisive surroundings are the same between space exploration and factory work. And he also should give evidences that can demonstrate the three advantages of robots when using in factory. At last he also should prove the three advantages can ensure efficiency and profit.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-12 at 02:53 ]

moria's cakeUID: 122815

谢谢帮我改哦，我看完你的就贴上来，考试加油哦

moria's cakeUID: 122815

The letter concludes that the use of robots can perform factory work more effectively, efficiently and profitably than human in that the robots never get sick, do not make mistake and can improve the morale of factory workers. The author infers that the robots never absent from the work, increase the output and are helpful for(to) the human workers. The letter seems sound, and gives the advantages of robots, but it contains several reasoning flaws.

First of all, the author presumptuously concludes that the use of robots in factory will bring reformation to factory due to the success of space explore by robots. But it is a false analog. The difference between space exploration and factory work is large. (个人认为这句应该和下一句话连成一句较好。改为“Space exploration is distinct from factory work.”或者直接就说“The gap between space exploration and factory work is large, thus the successful use of robots in exploring outer spaces cannot demonstrate……) The successful use of robot in exploring outer space cannot demonstrate the efficient and profitable use in factory. The outer space exploration may focus on stability and security due to the hard-control in space. The cost may cause no problem.( I think the cost matters no matter to the space exploration or factory work.)  But the use of robots in factory may emphasis on the efficiency and low-energy cost in that the profit is the primary goal in factory. The author ignores(根据新东方的老师说，尽量不要用ignore,而应用neglect，over look代替，ignore有故意忽略之意，略偏向于贬意，用在argument显得不够客观)the different purposes between them and makes the inconvincible conclusion.

Secondly, the letter concludes the robots can be efficient, effective and profitable. It bases on three reasons. First, the robots never（不要用这种感情色彩强烈的，太绝对的词语） reduce absenteeism because of ill-immune of robots. Indeed, the robots never get sick, but it cannot guarantee the absenteeism.（guarantee the exemption oof e of absenteeism）The robots will have mechanical problems which also  make them out of work. And the maintenance will take up the work time.(这一句最好和前面的连起来，否则有点啰嗦“Robots would get mechanical problems which might make them out of work  and take time to fix them. “) Second, the author confirms that the output can increase because the robots never make mistakes. But it(this ) also cannot be proved, 这里加because或者分成两句the output depends on several factors not only on the mistakes. The adjustment of robots when working 这里加逗号or the cooperation between robots and human works will influent the output. The third one,（好像没见过这种表述，改为the third one is, 或者Thirdly比较保险） the conclusion that the robots can improve the morale of workers is ridiculous.（again, don’t use words that express your personal or strong feelings, it would deprecates the objectivity of your argument  ） The use of robots will cause unemployment of human works. （workers）Even they can replace the boring and tedious work of human workers, the replaced ones should be trained to other work. (改为would have to be trained 转折的一位更加明显)..It has no relationship between morale and robots. （maybe they do have relationship, but not as positive as the arguer said, don’t be arbitrary）The reasoning shows that the author makes haste conclusion and neglects the surrounding factors when supporting his confirmation.

Thirdly, even if the three advantages are proved in factory, it is still far to say(这种表述似乎不太地道，改为far too early to say可能更好) that the profit and efficiency can be achieved. As we know, the profit of factory can be affected by many factors. The prices, the markets and other factors can be decisive(decisive 的用法有误，详细请看webster). Only the three advantages of robots cannot ensure the profit.

In sum, the author suffers false analog when inferring usefulness of robots in factory. And he makes haste conclusion when bolstering his conclusion. To convince me, he should prove conditions or decisive surroundings which are the same between space exploration and factory work.(这句需斟酌，因为前面已经提过二者的差距较大， 不可比，这里又说提供共同点，前后矛盾了。这是我的个人意见) And he also should give evidences that can demonstrate the three advantages of robots when using in factory. At last he also should prove the three advantages can ensure efficiency and profit.(最好两句话连起来)

longwaykingUID: 196798

改的真是认真，谢谢了
呵呵，继续互改