Argument71 【CSMY作文互改小组】第三组第7次作业

meichengyuUID: 2121098

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
WORDS: 380          TIME: 0:28:06          DATE: 2007-1-23

Citing several unfounded assumptions as well as some dubious evidence and presenting some simple analysis, the arguer asserts that we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly with a new copper-extracting technology. However, we do not have to look very far to see the line of the reasoning suffers from several critical flaws which will be discussed as follows.

To begin with, obviously, the author fails to establish the causal relationship between the new copper-extracting technology and the decline of electricity used by the copper-extraction. Though the new copper-extracting technologies can use up to less 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, there is no evidence to show that the total amount of raw ore would be the same as before which could influence the total amout of eletricity greatly. It is possible that the amount of eletricity declines in the specific yield but the total amount of electricity increases because of the yield of raw ore increased sharply. Thus, without ruling out such factor, the conclusion from the utilization of new technologies is hasty and unconvincing.

In addition, another point which may also weaken the logic of the argument is that the power source which determine the amount of electricity is also ignored by the arguer. It is highly possible that, although the old way to extract copper from ore is pretty wasting in electricity, the amount of electriciy is still lower than using new technologies because the power stations were so limited that could not afford the full running of the copper-extracting and after building more power plants it is enough to support the whole yield of copper-extracting. Lacking of the information about the support of power in the area past and now, the assertion from the limited evidence is dubious and irresponsible. So, in such case, the conclusion of the author is unwarranted either.

All in all, although the argument seems to be plausible, it is neither sound nor persuasive. The conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in this argument did not lend strong support to the arguer's claim. To make it logically acceptable, the author should have to provide much more specific evidence concerning to the factors mentioned above.

[ 本帖最后由 meichengyu 于 2007-1-25 20:24 编辑 ]

expire7UID: 2160574

http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/thread-596292-1-3.html

lonixUID: 2202232

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
WORDS: 380          TIME: 0:28:06          DATE: 2007-1-23

Citing several unfounded assumptions as well as some dubious evidence and presenting some simple analysis, the arguer asserts that we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly with a new copper-extracting technology. However, we do not have to look very far to see the line of the reasoning suffers from several critical flaws which will be discussed as follows.

To begin with, obviously, the author fails to establish the causal relationship between the new copper-extracting technology and the decline of electricity used by the copper-extraction. Though the new copper-extracting technologies can use up to less 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, there is no evidence to show that the total amount of raw ore would be the same as before which could influence the total amout of eletricity greatly. It is possible that the amount of eletricity declines in the specific yield but the total amount of electricity increases because of [because of 后面是名词的] the yield of raw ore increased sharply. Thus, without ruling out such factor, the conclusion from the utilization of new technologies is hasty and unconvincing.

In addition, another point which may also weaken the logic of the argument is that the power source which determine the amount of electricity is also ignored by the arguer. It is highly possible that, although the old way to extract copper from ore is pretty wasting in electricity, the amount of electriciy is still lower than using new technologies because the power stations were so limited that could not afford the full running of the copper-extracting and after building more power plants it is enough to support the whole yield of copper-extracting. Lacking of the information about the support of power in the area past and now, the assertion from the limited evidence is dubious and irresponsible [用irresponsible来修饰assertion 好像说不过去吧？]. So, in such case, the conclusion of the author is unwarranted either.
[我觉得电力部门供电的限制是一个方面的问题，但感觉比较牵强，如果电力部门供同样的点，新技术是不是会提高产量呢？或者炼同样多的矿是不是需要更少的点呢？这里有一种可能性，那就是他们的比较是在特别是矿物中铜的品位比较高的时候的比较，这就不一定能说明对于品位比较低的矿，新方法还能为我们省电，很有可能还不如旧的方法]

All in all, although the argument seems to be plausible, it is neither sound nor persuasive. The conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in this argument did not lend strong support to the arguer's claim. To make it logically acceptable, the author should have to provide much more specific evidence concerning to the factors mentioned above.
[最后一段根本就没提具体的事情了，完全就是一个普适的结尾，我觉得这样不太好，最起码应该说说关于新技术和减少电力的事情，对全文作一个完美的总结]

总的来说能在28分钟完成380字的文章，而且没有预先列提纲什么的，已经很不错了。