issue185 argument 2为我所用第五次作业

jenniferganUID: 2443583

TOPIC: ISSUE185 - "Scandals-whether in politics, academia, or other areas-can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could."
WORDS: 587          TIME: 00:57:41          DATE: 2008-3-28 10:01:11

I agree with the speaker to some extent, scandals could help arouse social attention to some issues. However, on the other hand, sandals could also bring some bad effects. My position would be supported through the following perspectives.

Scandals really shift people's attention on the problems otherwise we may neglect. As society is more and more complex, we always pay no attention on the things that we are not interested, scandals somtimes draw our attention to something we do not care before. Perhaps the paradigmatic modern example is the Watergate scandal. Early in that scandal it would have been temping to dismiss it as involving one isolated incidence of underhanded campaign tactics. But, in retrospect the scandal forever increased the level of scrutiny and accountability to which our public officials are held, thereby working a significant and lasting benefit to our society. More recently, the professor in Beijing university quote other's theory without label it, it is a scandal in academic, which has made great influence in the academic and also other areas. Thus, all the people become to thinking of academic ethies. A lot of universities and colleges have strengthened their management on academic. The positive effect prove that scandals is do somthing good to soceity to a extent.

Although some problems has draw the public's attention, but in mant cases they distract the attention of the public away from more important social affairs. At the community level, for example, several years ago, the chancellor of a university located in my city was for misusing university funds to renovate his posh personal residence. Every new development during the scandals became front-page news in the campus newspaper. But did this scandal serve any useful purpose? No, the scandal did not reveal any pervasive problem with university accounting practices. It did not result in any sort of useful system-wide reform. Rather, it was merely one incidence of petty misapproporriation. Moreover, the scandal distracted the university community from far more important issues, such as affirmative action and campus safety, which were relegated to the second page of the campus newspapre during the scandal.

Even on a society level, sandals can serve chiefly to distract the public's attention to something which in not so important. For example, the rosy stories of the super stars are always the front-page news of entainment newpaper to attract people's eye. Do these rosy stories contribute to our society for its development? Of course not, they are just waste people's time. There is another issue even all the people in the earth know it, but time will tell whether Colliton sex scandal will benefit our political, social or legal system. The scandal did no benifit to society at all. Admittdely, it is a waste of time and energy of the public when comes to such kind of scandals.

On a personal level, scandals allways do much more harmness. Because the scandals are a usually the private affairs of somebody, when they are exposed to the public, it is undoubtedly a kind of press and injury to the person. For example, when some star was be exposed to the public that she had broken up with her boyfriend, she choose to kill herself in China. After all, it is legal to protect anybody's privacy.

In sum, I agree that scandals often serve to some important social and political problems more effective than any speaker.  However, whether a scandal works more benefit than harm to community or society or personnell must be addressed on a case-by-case basis.




TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
WORDS: 453          TIME: 00:35:20          DATE: 2008-3-28 10:01:11


In this letter, a committee of homeowners from the deerhaven acres recommends that in order to raise property values of deerhaven acres homeowners should follow certain restrictions concerning their homes' exterior appearance. To support the recommends they point out that in the seven years since Brookville community adopted a set of restriction on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted the property values there have risen. This argument rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

In the recommendation, the committee of homeowners indicated that the property value rised because of the restrictions. The letter failed to substantiate the assumption. If these restrictions were not implemented, then any other change in brookville's property values cannot be attributed to them. However, the committee cannot draw any firm conclusion about what effect similar restrictions would have on deerhaven property values.

Even assuming that the brookvile homeowners implemented the restrictions, the committee relies on the additional assumption that this cause of action was responsible for the increase. In fact, property values are a function of supply and demands. Maybe not the restrictions caused the average property value tripled in brookvile, but some other causes. Perhaps more and more citizens move in broolvile lead to the need of housing is increasing, or because rapid development of community in brookvile makes the value risen, or some other causes.

Even assuming that the brookvile's rising property values are attributable to the implement of these restrictions, it is the things seven years ago, people maybe will not accept the restrictions now. in all, seven years ago, these restrictions make the property value risen does not mean that they will get the same effect now.

Moreover, the committee fails to consider possible difference between brookvile and deerhaven arces that might bring about a different result for deerhaven. For instance, potential deerhaven home-buyers might be less interested in a home's exterior appearance than Brookville home-buyers. For that matter, perhaps deerhaven home-buyers would find these restrictions appearance a distasteful feature which case adopting these restrictions might actually tend to decrease deerhaven property values. If the commuty and shopping of deerhaven is not as convinent as that of broolville, potential home-buyers of deerhaven will less than broolvile, too. Also, property value of deerhaven will decreased, too.

In conclusion, if deerhave want to adopt the proposed restrictions the committee must supply clear evidence that the implementation of broolville's restrictions, such as the commit of the home-buyers, and not some other factors was responsible for the rise of property value. The committee must also provide evidence that other factors affecting home prices in two areas are otherwise essentially the same.

bitdxcUID: 2465290

TOPIC: ISSUE185 - "Scandals-whether in politics, academia, or other areas-can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could."
WORDS: 587          TIME: 00:57:41          DATE: 2008-3-28 10:01:11

I agree with the speaker to some extent, scandals could help arouse social attention to some issues. However, on the other hand, sandals could also bring some bad effects. My position would be supported through the following perspectives.

Scandals really shift people's attention on the problems otherwise we may neglect. As society is more and more complex, we always pay no attention on the things that we are not interested, scandals sometimes(sometimes) draw our attention to something we do not care before. Perhaps the paradigmatic modern example is the Watergate scandal. Early in that scandal it would have been temping to dismiss it as involving one isolated incidence of underhanded campaign tactics. But, in retrospect the scandal forever increased the level of scrutiny and accountability to which our public officials are held, thereby working a significant and lasting benefit to our society. More recently, the professor in Beijing university(Peking University) quote other's theory without label it, it is a scandal in academic, which has made great influence in the academic and also other areas. Thus, all the people become to thinking of academic ethies(ethics). A lot of universities and colleges have strengthened their management on academic. The positive effect prove that scandals is do something(something) good to soceity(societ) to a extent.

Although some problems has draw(drawn) public's attention, but in mant(many) cases they distract the attention of the public away from more important social affairs. At the community level, for example, several years ago, the chancellor of a university located in my city was for misusing university funds to renovate his posh personal residence. Every new development during the scandals became front-page news in the campus newspaper. But did this scandal serve any useful purpose? No, the scandal did not reveal any pervasive problem with university accounting practices. It did not result in any sort of useful system-wide reform. Rather, it was merely one incidence of petty misapproporriation(misapproporiation). Moreover, the scandal distracted the university community from far more important issues, such as affirmative action and campus safety, which were relegated to the second page of the campus newspapre(newpaper) during the scandal.

Even on a society level, sandals can serve chiefly to distract the public's attention to something which in not so important. For example, the rosy stories of the super stars are always the front-page news of entainment newpaper(entertainment newspaper) to attract people's eye. Do these rosy stories contribute to our society for its development? Of course not, they are just waste people's time. There is another issue even all the people in the earth know it, but time will tell whether Colliton(Clinton) sex scandal will benefit our political, social or legal system. The scandal did no benifit(benefits) to society at all. Admittdely(admittedly), it is a waste of time and energy of the public when comes to such kind of scandals.

On a personal level, scandals allways(always) do much more harmness(harm). Because the scandals are a(删除) usually the private affairs of somebody, when they are exposed to the public, it is undoubtedly a kind of press and injury to the person. For example, when some star was be exposed to the public that she had broken up with her boyfriend, she choose to kill herself in China. After all, it is legal to protect anybody's privacy.

In sum, I agree that scandals often serve to some important social and political problems more effective than any speaker.  However, whether a scandal works more benefit than harm to community or society or personnell(personnel) must be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

评价：
思路清晰，语言流畅，注意一下拼写错误和动词的事态和冠词的使用，会更好。


TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
WORDS: 453          TIME: 00:35:20          DATE: 2008-3-28 10:01:11


In this letter, a committee of homeowners from the deerhaven acres recommends that in order to raise property values of deerhaven acres homeowners should follow certain restrictions concerning their homes' exterior appearance. To support the recommends they point out that in the seven years since Brookville community adopted a set of restriction on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted the property values there have risen. This argument rests on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

In the recommendation, the committee of homeowners indicated that the property value rised because of the restrictions. The letter failed to substantiate the assumption. If these restrictions were not implemented, then any other（去掉）change in Brookville’s property values cannot be attributed to them. However(什么意思，转折吗？), the committee cannot draw any firm conclusion about what effect similar restrictions would have on deerhaven property values.

Even assuming that the Brookville homeowners implemented the restrictions, the committee relies on the additional assumption that this cause of action was responsible for the increase(插入, which is unwarranted either). In fact, property values are a function of supply and demands. Maybe not the restrictions caused the average property value tripled in Brookville, but some other causes. Perhaps more and more citizens move in Brookville lead to the need of housing is increasing, or because rapid development of community in Brookville makes the value risen, or some other causes.

Even assuming that the Brookville’s rising property values are attributable to the implement of these restrictions, it is the things seven years ago, people maybe will not accept the restrictions now. in all, seven years ago, these restrictions make the property value risen does not mean that they will get the same effect now.

Moreover, the committee fails to consider possible difference between Brookville and Deerhaven arces that might bring about a different result for Deerhaven. For instance, potential Deerhaven home-buyers might be less interested in a home's exterior appearance than Brookville home-buyers. For that matter, perhaps Deerhaven home-buyers would find these restrictions appearance a distasteful feature which case adopting these restrictions might actually tend to decrease Deerhaven property values. If the commuty and shopping of Deerhaven is not as convenient as that of Brookville, potential home-buyers of Deerhaven will less than Brookville, too. Also, property value of Deerhaven will decrease, too.

In conclusion, if deerhave want to adopt the proposed restrictions the committee must supply clear evidence that the implementation of Brookville’s restrictions, such as the commit of the home-buyers, and not some other factors was responsible for the rise of property value. The committee must also provide evidence that other factors affecting home prices in two areas are otherwise essentially the same.

评价：
逻辑清楚，批驳有利，注意一下地名的大写和一些连词的用法会更好。