Argument38 --同主题写作 From 荧惑

荧惑UID: 2280559

TOPIC: ARGUMENT38 - The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.

"An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."

Time:30.00   Words:479

In the memo, the author claims that the daily use of Ichtaid can prevent colds and lower absenteeism. The argument appears to be somehow appealing, but a close exanimation will reveal how groundless it is.

First, there is no evidence to support that people seldom visit the doctor in East Meria is due to the high fish consumption. The frequency of visiting hospital is influenced by many factors besides ailments. It is highly possible that the people in East Meria can not afford the cost of treatment for colds. For that matter, even if the people in East Meria got ill, they still not go to hospital. Or the people in East Meria only took some pills to treat the colds. If it is the case, there is no causal relation between fish consumption and low frequency to treat for cold. In short, the author fails to prove the high fish consumption will lead to the low possibility to get cold.

Second, the author unfairly assumes that the more people prevent cold, the less absence happen. In fact, it is not the case. Lacking of the evidence that those who take clod as a reason for absenting from school and work really got cold, it is entirely possible that persons only take cold as an excuse. On other word, people who not got cold cheated for absenting. For that matter, even if the fish consumption prevents colds, people still absent from school and work for suffering from cold as before. Unfortunately, the author fails to consider such possibility.

Third, the assumption that the Ichthaid has the same function as fish is unreasonable. Common sense tells us that fish oil only contain a part of nutrition in fish. So it is possible the component which can prevent colds in fish can not be obtained from fish oil. If it is the case, then the fish oil is totally meaningless in preventing from cold and lowering absenteeism.

Finally, even if all assumptions described above are true, it is also doubtful that the facts drawn from East Meria are applicable to the West Meria. It is possible that the component which can prevent colds in fish takes effect in the residents in West Meria and is useless for the residents in East Meria, as some of us recovered from taking aspirin and the others do not. If it is the case, the high fish consumption or the daily use of Ichthaid would not provide a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism in the West Meria which leads to the memo is unconvincing.

In sum, the argument is not well-reasoned. To make it logically accepted, the author should cite the evidence that the patient who got colds caused the absences a lot. Further the author has to provide the efficiency of fish oil to prevent cold to the West Meria residents.

[ 本帖最后由 荧惑 于 2007-3-30 11:02 编辑 ]

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

lz这篇文章段落间完全没有逻辑关系，好像想到一个错误写一个错误
这篇argment作者逻辑很清楚，可以一段一段让步的写下来

荧惑UID: 2280559

哈， 其实我也想过让步的...但我只会even if ....
这个这个连用三段是不是太倒胃口啦...
还有什么可以让步？？:(

annlyseaUID: 2219320

还有I concede that  , but

要不就是granted that,,, but~~

不过限时的时候要特意用才行
我限时多半就只用主谓句，加上从句了，看得是小孩写的
HUHU

荧惑UID: 2280559

我还是觉得一路让步下来不好，可能把这个攻击点并在一起比较好...:(

annlyseaUID: 2219320

ennnn

其实都是要顾及的
所以很需要技术

荧惑UID: 2280559

呵呵，限时的话要组织好结构的话，难度好大啊...Iloveissue...

荧惑UID: 2280559

结合Iloveissue...重新理了下思路...
1. 攻击高鱼耗量和少去看医生的关系
  ---1. 少看病不代表不得病
  ---2. 高鱼耗量不代表一定是人吃的
  ---3. 吃鱼和不感冒没有直接关系

2. 攻击生病和出勤率的关系

3. 攻击鱼油和鱼的关系

4. 攻击Em和Wm的关系

daphneliUID: 2247309

感觉模板的痕迹明显， 其实各个BODY 还可以深入一些， 呵呵

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

1. 攻击高鱼耗量和少去看医生的关系
  ---1. 少看病不代表不得病
  ---2. 高鱼耗量不代表一定是人吃的
  ---3. 吃鱼和不感冒没有直接关系

2. 攻击生病和出勤率的关系--
                                         2，3可以交换一下，写攻击鱼油和鱼的关系，让步，攻击生病和出勤率的关系
3. 攻击鱼油和鱼的关系----

4. 攻击Em和Wm的关系 ---这点我觉得没必要，也不是太好写

iq28UID: 2152875

段落之间的顺序总结的时候再说吧
觉得你的顺序确实比较乱

In the memo, the author claims that the daily use of Ichtaid can prevent colds and lower absenteeism. The argument appears to be somehow appealing, but a close exanimation will reveal how groundless it is.

First, there is no evidence to support that people seldom visit the doctor in East Meria is due to the high fish consumption. The frequency of visiting hospital is influenced by many factors besides ailments. (没有直接贴紧主要攻击对象.需要攻击的是什么?) It is highly possible that the people in East Meria can not afford the cost of treatment for colds. For that matter, even if the people in East Meria got ill, they still not go to hospital. Or the people in East Meria only took some pills to treat the colds. If it is the case, there is no causal relation between fish consumption and low frequency to treat for cold. In short, the author fails to prove the high fish consumption will lead to the low possibility to get cold. (这段攻击基本不关吃鱼的事情,只是说了去医院不等于有感冒,觉得不用写到红字的这句.攻击的是作者推理的根基.事实上觉得这个只是一个小错误,不要花这么大的篇幅写,一笔带过即可.)

Second, the author unfairly assumes that the more people prevent cold, the less absence happen. In fact, it is not the case. Lacking of the evidence that those who take clod as a reason for absenting from school and work really got cold, it is entirely possible that persons only take cold as an excuse. On (In) other word, people who not got cold cheated for absenting. (句法有问题,而且觉得这句也没必要说,罗唆) For that matter, even if the fish consumption prevents colds, people still absent from school and work for suffering from cold as before. Unfortunately, the author fails to consider such possibility. (不深入.在for that matter之前还是要指出只是把cold当成excute之后,吃鱼就算能防止感冒,abscence仍然无法下降的动态细节过程)

Third, the assumption that the Ichthaid has the same function as fish is unreasonable. Common sense tells us that fish oil only contain a part of nutrition in fish. So it is possible the component which can prevent colds in fish can not be obtained from fish oil. If it is the case, then the fish oil is totally meaningless in preventing from cold and lowering absenteeism. (太单薄了.看pippo1983
这段是怎么攻击的,你楼上)

Finally, even if all assumptions described above are true, it is also doubtful that the facts drawn from East Meria are applicable to the West Meria. It is possible that the component which can prevent colds in fish takes effect in the residents in West Meria and is useless for the residents in East Meria, as some of us recovered from taking aspirin and the others do not. (这句是很bingo,但是整段来看细节还是少了.反例局限在人的体质上是肯定写不多的.可以考虑两地感冒的不同原因.) If it is the case, the high fish consumption or the daily use of Ichthaid would not provide a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism in the West Meria which leads to the memo is unconvincing.

In sum, the argument is not well-reasoned. To make it logically accepted, the author should cite the evidence that the patient who got colds caused the absences a lot. Further the author has to provide the efficiency of fish oil to prevent cold to the West Meria residents.

整体布局问题相当大
准备当反面教材吧;d:

pippo1983UID: 172110

In the memo, the author claims that the daily use of Ichtaid can prevent colds and lower absenteeism. The argument appears to be somehow appealing, but a close exanimation will reveal how groundless it is.

First, there is no evidence to support that people seldom visit the doctor in East Meria is due to the high fish consumption. The frequency of visiting hospital is influenced by many factors besides ailments（这个句子很别扭，改成是否去医院和感冒没有必然联系为好，和后面也对应）. It is highly possible that the people in East Meria can not afford the cost of treatment for colds. For that matter, even if the people in East Meria got ill（为什么要夸大？前面是感冒，这里变成所有病了。。）, they still not go to hospital. Or the people in East Meria only took some （over-the-counter）pills to treat the colds. If it is the case, there is no causal relation between fish consumption and low frequency to treat for cold. In short, the author fails to prove the high fish consumption will lead to the low possibility to get cold. （这段与其说你证明了鱼和感冒无关，不如说你证明了感冒和去医院次数无关，逻辑上不严密）

Second, the author unfairly assumes that the more people prevent cold, the less absence happen. In fact, it is not the case. Lacking of the evidence that those who take clod as a reason for absenting from school and work really got cold, it is entirely possible that persons only take cold as an excuse. On other word, people who not got cold cheated for absenting. For that matter, even if the fish consumption prevents colds, people still absent from school and work for suffering from cold as before. Unfortunately, the author fails to consider such possibility.

Third, the assumption that the Ichthaid has the same function as fish is unreasonable. Common sense tells us that fish oil only contain a part of nutrition in fish. So it is possible the component which can prevent colds in fish can not be obtained from fish oil. If it is the case, then the fish oil is totally meaningless in preventing from cold and lowering absenteeism.

Finally, even if all assumptions described above are true, it is also doubtful that the facts drawn from East Meria are applicable to the West Meria. It is possible that the component which can prevent colds in fish takes effect in the residents in West Meria and is useless for the residents in East Meria, as some of us recovered from taking aspirin and the others do not（这个例子，有点不好. If it is the case （这个句式用太多了）, the high fish consumption or the daily use of Ichthaid would not provide a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism in the West Meria which leads to the memo is unconvincing.

In sum, the argument is not well-reasoned. To make it logically accepted, the author should cite the evidence that the patient who got colds caused the absences a lot. Further the author has to provide the efficiency of fish oil to prevent cold to the West Meria residents.

整体上确实逻辑连续性差些。

荧惑UID: 2280559

:( ......
端正态度,好好学习~;d:

iq28UID: 2152875

原帖由 荧惑 于 2007-3-30 14:15 发表
结合Iloveissue...重新理了下思路...
1. 攻击高鱼耗量和少去看医生的关系
  ---1. 少看病不代表不得病
  ---2. 高鱼耗量不代表一定是人吃的
  ---3. 吃鱼和不感冒没有直接关系

2. 攻击生病和出勤率的关系 ...

1里面最重要的是3
1-1和1-2都是为了1-3服务

荧惑UID: 2280559

恩，晓得呢～～;d: