argument220 瞅瞅给点意见吧，谢谢

ghost33UID: 2267869

TOPIC: ARGUMENT220 - The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.

"A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media."
WORDS: 454          TIME: 0:46:13          DATE: 2007-7-13

At first glance, it seems reasonable for potential writers to prepare for working for TV, since the study indicates that TV industries have more opportunity to increase their profit, compared with the publishing and bookselling industries. But further reflect shows that this argument suffers from several logical flaws which undoubtedly undermine the argument.

To begin with, the foundation of the whole argument is a study, whose credibility is quite questionable. For one thing, the study's question is about describing a typical day's conversation, and the arguer only cites one result: references to watching TV and reading fiction are 23 to 1 on average. It is common for people to talk about things got from TV, since though different people have different interests and jobs, almost everyone has a minute for TV at home; and that it is safe to talk about TV programs with other people. Moreover, generally speaking, people who talk much are often extravert and enjoy getting news from TV and then share with other people and discuss them; while people who are fond of fictions often remain at home and seldom talk with other people. So, provided that the study was conducted in a way that the studier picked out people who were talking in a group in a park or some other public places, such result is not surprising at all.

For another, the study only gets 24 answers, which cannot represent the general people. Supposed that the study is done by a group of friends who have similar interests, using its result to predict the public opinion is quite unreasonable.

Moreover, this study only tells us how often people talk about information got from TV and fiction, and has nothing to do with the profit of these industries. Not everyone talks all the information they know. Don't talk about fiction does not necessarily mean that they don't read fiction. And the print media does not print fiction only; newspapers, magazines, prose, poem and so on are also presented on print media. The incomplete information of the study cannot convince me that print media is on a disadvantage stage.

Last but not least, the arguer assumes that those potential writers should choose their careers based entirely on the prosperity of certain industry, which renders the recommendation not as sound as it stands. Admittedly, a prosperous industry can offer more job opportunity and handsome salary. But every writer has his/her own preference, and not everyone can succeed in a TV industry. Without considering the differences among various individuals, his/her recommendation should not be taken seriously.

In conclusion, this argument is not well substantiated. To bolster his/her recommendation, the arguer should provide more information about the study and take personal differences into consideration.

[ 本帖最后由 ghost33 于 2007-7-17 18:59 编辑 ]

ghost33UID: 2267869

:) 很不错咧。
第三段什么调查者是一圈朋友好像这点不太好，人家调查总是讲究随机的，谁会找一圈朋友来调查？

Moreover, generally speaking, people who talk much are often exterior and enjoy getting news from TV and then share with other people and discuss them; while people who are fond of fictions often remain at home and seldom talk with other people.
这可以变成题目用来写 arrgument了。