argument131 fly aw 第三十六次作业

exp03UID: 2158827

TOPIC: ARGUMENT131 - The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.

"The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni."
WORDS: 204          TIME: 1:10:00          DATE: 2006-7-10

The argument is not cogent because it assumes that the declining of fish number in Tria Island is caused by over fishing, which is not necessarily the case. The argument asserts that the method of protecting fish and other marine wildlife is to adopt bans of Omni. We can find several unclear aspects in the arguer's decline.

First, the argument asserts that some other regulations are banned except fishing, thus, it cause the declining. We can not agree this opinion unless more evidences show it is the only element to consider at last.

If we can not exclude the influence of pollution caused by bans of offshore oil drilling, we can not believe that the bad result is caused by fishing. Imagine the picture that oil leaks into the ocean, causes the water turn black and improper to the living of fish and wild sea animals. Do the drilling people are giving enough attention on it? If not, it may the main reason of the decline of animal’s number.

If we can not exclude the possibility of dumping, people may crazily go on fishing outside 20 miles of Tria. If so, not fishing leads to the disaster in nature, it is people who can escape from the law lead to the disaster.  

Besides, other reasons also can cause the reduced number of fish. Some fish have to migrate every year for breeding, so cause the number of fish dramatically reducing in somewhere; Waste water from factories in the city also can cause pollution and the death of fish; season change may be another aspect influence on the results of the research to get statistics. But none information is known by readers.
   
At last, it also gives an example in Omni which seems good to show the effect of banning fishing. But the arguer ignores the difference of geological and economic characters in these two areas, and it may give out different results when using the same regulation. Omni, where may almost have no oil to mine, does not need to fear the pollution by drilling oil, so, the ban only declares forbidden mine in 10 miles. And, it may be an area with fish breeding, where people do not need to catch fish from ocean and do not need get profits from dumping. So it properly makes its bans. But situation may opposite in Tria. Fishing may be their backbone industry, therefore, it can not be banned. Otherwise, it become so important to maintain the good quality of water that 20 miles is the least distance that can be admitted drilling oil.

So, to protect fish and other wild lives in Tria, government needs more work to show detail and believable statistics and evidences on how to make adopt regulations and bans. It is unwise to completely copy another area’s regulation where is not similar to Tria.

[ 本帖最后由 exp03 于 2006-7-11 19:35 编辑 ]

yogurt4UID: 198389

虽然写了很多错误
但是前面有很多错误根本没有反驳到位
文章可以再改一下,从基础的问题开始反驳,写清楚3个错误

yogurt4UID: 198389

恩,lz前段时间没来吧
突然想起我们上一g的时候也打过交道呢
好好加油哦,yogurt alway adds you oil!!

exp03UID: 2158827

谢谢yogurt
在besides前面的几段内容都是在讲一个问题，觉得太长看上去很恼火就把他们分开了，这些分说的几点都要详细说明么？
像这一段If we can not exclude the possibility of dumping, people may crazily go on fishing outside 20 miles of Tria. If so, not fishing leads to the disaster in nature, it is people who can escape from the law lead to the disaster.除了说这些人为因素还能怎么展开说呢？期待解答
挺不好意思的，还有中文在里面……

yogurt4UID: 198389

原帖由 exp03 于 2006-7-11 19:45 发表
谢谢yogurt
在besides前面的几段内容都是在讲一个问题，觉得太长看上去很恼火就把他们分开了，这些分说的几点都要详细说明么？
像这一段If we can not exclude the possibility of dumping, people may crazily ...

The argument is not cogent because it assumes that the declining of fish number in Tria Island is caused by over fishing, which is not necessarily the case.直接指出原来的错误结论就好啦，not cogent because..which is not necessarily the case这样的话还是放到正文里面说，开头用不太合适 The argument asserts that the method of protecting fish and other marine wildlife is to adopt bans of Omni. We can find several unclear换个词 aspects in the arguer's decline.

First, the argument asserts that some other regulations are banned except fishing, thus, it it到底指代的什么？也可以是前面整个分句。我看了几遍才发现你的意思是fishing,指代不明。cause the declining. We can not agree this opinion unless more evidences show it is the only element to consider at last.

先不说内容,语言上跳跃太大,一个句子前半句的内容还没有说清楚,后半句就讲到别的地方去了,这样就让你的论证显的不完整.
看这句

If we can not exclude the possibility of dumping, people may crazily go on fishing outside 20 miles of Tria.

前后两个分句的内容能压到一个句子里写么?这一段整个都看得有点迷茫.

原因在哪里?我们在看一段的上面:

If we can not exclude the influence of pollution caused by bans of offshore oil drilling, we can not believe that the bad result is caused by fishing.

这就是你在做压缩的工作.实际上,这里写起来可以分成两到三个部分
fisrt,我们不能从作者给出的论据中看出鱼群数量下降的真正原因
1)不能排除污染的因素,有可能污染来自海上原油泄露.
2)即使不是污染造成鱼群数量下降,还有可能有其他原因:鱼群迁徙,或者捕捞.但捕捞只是一种可能,而不是确定的原因,作者没有给出渔业相关数据,所以把捕捞归结为鱼群数量下降的唯一原因是不对的.

你少做了这个分1)2)的工作,所以后面反驳看起来有点乱.
为什么说你攻击不到位呢?感觉你有点注意攻击错误的数量/字数,结果前面写的飞快
清晰而有力度的argument不是这样的,而要把自己思路的每一个重要环节,每一个转折和论证的推进都具体表现在文字上,你再仔细看看.

在besides前面的几段内容都是在讲一个问题，觉得太长看上去很恼火就把他们分开了

其实写一个大问题,总是由处理小问题的过程得来的
首先要想清楚,很少有题目能让你老围在一个问题讲的说,细节是不一样的.
还有一个问题的是,结构和内容的关系是密不可分的,怎么划分段落其实很有讲究.
argument已经给你减少了很多麻烦,至少你可以按照错误来分段.你分开写的原因是没有理清自己的攻击思路,习作看上去,除了上面我讲的有点乱以外,感觉也嫌"散"了一点.


继续加油
:o:o

runningpiggyUID: 194977

原帖由 yogurt4 于 2006-7-12 01:24 发表

The argument is not cogent because it assumes that the declining of fish number in Tria Island is caused by over fishing, which is not necessarily the case.直接指出原来的错误结论就好啦，not cogen ...

33我实在是佩服你佩服得一塌糊涂。。。

yogurt4UID: 198389

原帖由 runningpiggy 于 2006-7-12 01:34 发表

33我实在是佩服你佩服得一塌糊涂。。。

我早就升华到变态的级别了
nod

kito9695UID: 209685

原帖由 yogurt4 于 2006-7-12 01:36 发表


我早就升华到变态的级别了
nod

疯了~老大你重回来吧...压力压力= =|||

expire7UID: 2160574

老大太厉害了，敬仰之情如黄河决堤.............嗯人民又要受苦了。