[技术思考] 关于argument论证充实深入的实验报告v1.1 [复制链接]

imong
UID: 140258

永久会员

Rank: 16

声望: 266
寄托币: 22475
注册时间: 2003-7-14
精华: 88
帖子: 188

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2004-3-19 12:43:51 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

关于argument论证充实深入的实验报告v1.1！

by imong

对1.0版本的错误已经作出更正，并且增加了对4个范文段落的分析。

实验数据帖：https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=174954
感谢各位的大力支持。btw，看这篇文章的时候各位把两个帖子都打开吧，免得找不明白在说什么。

实验目的：研究体现argument论证充实深入的元素

实验原理和步骤：

argument121
The following is a memo from the president of Cyberell Computer Company.
'All of our customer-service employees recently attended a two-day retreat during which they received retraining in effective customer service. Subsequently, Cyberell's employee-performance study showed that the retreat benefited new employees—those who have worked with Cyberell for less than two years—far more than it did experienced employees. According to the study, after the retreat new employees were able to handle an average of ten percent more calls per hour, and the total number of customer complaints about new employees decreased, but experienced employees showed little improvement in these areas. Therefore, Cyberell should send only new employees to future retreats and should use the resulting savings to double the length of the retreats so that the retreats will be more likely to yield optimum employee performance.'

大家仅仅针对experienced employees showed little improvement in these areas cannot support that experienced workers have no progress after the retreat这一点来写paragraph，当然，不是只允许写一个paragraph。只写这一个驳斥点而不要管别的。把自己写好的paragraph贴在下面。或者，以上面这个现成的版本为基础自己进行改写。

然后我们攒够十几个片断argument之后前后前好好比较一下：到底哪个片断论述充分，哪个片断比较菜，原因在哪里，体现在哪里，技巧和注意事项在哪里，等等。好好的讨论一下。免得每次都说“argument展开要充分”到头来还是不明白怎么叫充分。

数据处理和分析：

呃，这个…我给的TS是experienced employees showed little improvement in these areas cannot support that experienced workers have no progress after the retreat，怎么有人给写成了The mere fact that the experienced employees show little improvement during the process of retreat doesn't represent that such training is useless for them，还有such… is not designed for them，汗……（不过写得倒未必不好，真的！）言归正传。

跟帖里面找到两个反面教材：

The arguer unfairly concludes that experienced employees made no progress after the 2 days treat for the reason that they showed little improvement on the skills of handling cells and customer satisfaction. First of all, it is likely that 2 days treat is too short for them to make improvement as large as fresh employees because of the high level they have being maintained. Secondly, it is also likely that experienced employees benefit a lot from the effective customer service training which do not reflect from the study, such as the skills on other aspect. The arguer cannot convince me the ineffectiveness of training unless the facts above have been ruled out. （by 吭哧吭哧啃啃）

这篇是我一开始就给的：
In addition, the fact that experienced employees showed little improvement in these areas cannot support that experienced workers have no progress after the retreat. Experienced workers already have the skill at such high level before retreat that they make little mistakes. After the retreat, their improvement cannot embodied in the work, but it doesn't mean they don't have progress.（by 蓝迦绫）

这两个段落里面提到的驳斥点有：
1. 2天不够让experienced employees make improvement
2. experienced employees得到的收获并没有直接显示出来

我们就捡最容易找的“隐性进步”这一点，纵向对比一下：

by apolloxp
It is possible that after the retreat, experienced employees have also progressed in that they knew more clearly the needs of the customers and were more capable of dealing with it more properly. They could already handle more calls per hour before the retreat. On the other hand, as experienced employees might be able to solve such difficult problems that new employees considered bewildering.
这个段落和第一个版本里面仅有的such as the skills on other factors的对比就很强烈了，虽然在这里整体critique的空间/逻辑顺序并不算很理想，但至少比上面的充实多了。再看一个：

by springy
The fact that experienced employees showed little improvement in these areas cannot support that experienced workers have no progress after the retreat. In this memo, it seems that the speaker defined the improvement only to be an increase of calls handled, and a decrease of the complaints from customers. However, the definition is quite limited because the speaker just focused on the number, but ignored the quality. Maybe the calls handled by experienced employees gave the customers more satisfaction than before, although the number was not added apparently, and the company hadn't noted the better reflections from customers. Another possibility also exist that the progress of those new employees the speaker had found was not the direct result of the retreat. In fact, longer time in the work field and more thinking are always helpful for everyone to improve his work efficiency.
后面那个another possibility没看出来在说什么，不过前面关于quality和数量的区别的确给说了个清清楚楚。

再例如seeseafast提到的more patient之类的方面，都是比such as skills on other aspects要好得多。

而最好的应该是这个（在我给定的TS下面，btw，syd你的段落跑掉了，看看你的最后一句话和TS），虽然…TS似乎不是“隐性进步”了。-_-|
By Daffi
The fact experienced employees showed little improvement in these areas cannot support that experienced workers have no progress after the retreat. The arguer here made an ungrounded assumption that no other factors but the two-day retreat affect the performance of the experienced employees. In fact, some other possibilities should be taken into consideration. A quite probable possibility is that as a result of the two-day retreat, the experienced employees have made such great improvement that more difficult calls are assigned to them. Given easier and less calls, the new employees are certainly able to be seemingly more efficient and receive less customer complains. Then how could we draw a conclusion that the experienced employees have made no progress after the two-day retreat? To substantiate his argument, the arguer should provide more valid evidences showing there is cause-and-effect relationship between little improvement and no progress of the experienced, not two isolated phenomenons.
这一段话提出了很具体的一个可能，并且全段落都在围绕这个可能来进行分析，很集中火力的一个段落。不过建议在Given easier..前面再加上一句，说明他们的整体performance和更tough的TASK的关系之间是怎么样的一个过程（其实就是因为难度的提高使得没有显示出improvement这样一个意思给表达出来），然后再看到后面说新手的工作难度并没有提高，这样就很bingo了。

我从另外一个角度出发，写了一个段落，主要是考虑到这次retreat和future retreat是否相同这一assumption：

In addition, the fact that experienced employees showed little improvements after the latest retreat does not necessarily follows that it is unworthy to send those experienced workers to all future retreats because in the latest retreat, what kind of training was given and for whom it was designed were not provided, and even worse, whether future retreat will be exactly the same of the latest one is not mentioned. For example, It is quite possible that the major purpose of the latest treat is to solve the question of experience, that is to say, to teach the trainees how to gain experience from the experienced workers, in this sense, it is natural that the already experienced employees would improve little compared with the novice. However, if the future treats are to focus on the creativity or originality of its employees, the result might be on the contrary. Under such circumstance, it is entirely possible that the experienced employees will improve greatly while the new employees achieve little. Unless the arguer could confirm that the future retreats will not be designed for experienced employees as the latest one does, to exclude experienced employees from all future retreats will by no means be a wise practice.

很可惜的是并没有这个TS下面的ETS范文，不过参照范文我们也可以看出来一些端倪：

However, the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit.  Such alternatives may include the fact that there are less reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville, or that the age bracket of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely.  It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford. 前面的age bracket在下一句得到了很好的阐述 In addition, the citizens have failed to consider the geographical and physical terrain of the two different areas. Perhaps Forestville's highway is in an area of more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur. 在这里，三个具体的反例用词一下子就说明问题了：很具体，而不是空泛的geographical difference. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area. 从而therefore得到对比就很顺利了，同时不忘交待对方：Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.

另外一篇6分的：
Finally, there is absolutely no evidence provided that high quality (and presumably more expensive) gear is any more beneficial than other kinds of gear.  For example, a simple white t-shirt may provide the same preventative benefit as a higher quality, more expensive, shirt designed only for skating.  Before skaters are encouraged to invest heavily in gear, a more complete understanding of the benefit provided by individual pieces of gear would be helpful.很简单也很清楚明了，注意三句话各自的位置和功用。

而看看同一个题目下面6分和5分的对比：
6
The argument above is weakened by the fact that it does not take into account the inherent differences between skaters who wear gear and those who do not.  It is at least likely that those who wear gear may be generally more responsible and/or safety conscious individuals.  The skaters who wear gear may be less likely to cause accidents through careless or dangerous behavior.  It may, in fact, be their natural caution and responsibility that keeps them out of the emergency room rather than the gear itself.

5
However, the conclusion that protective gear and reflective equipment would "greatly reduce.risk of being severely injured" is premature.  Data is lacking with reference to the total population of skaters and the relative levels of experience, skill and physical coordination of that population.  It is entirely possible that further research would indicate that most serious injury is averted by the skater's ability to react quickly and skillfully in emergency situations.

对比6分段落的详细分析而言，这里的it is entirely possible未免单薄一些。既没有上面的it may, in fact, be…句的对比总结，也没有it is at least… 的背景铺垫，相当于直接给出了the skaters who…句（虽然内容上不尽相同）。而这一串total population of skaters， the relative levels of experience, skill and physical coordination of that population并没有例如conscious individual这样的反例来得实在。

我觉得到此，大家完全可以自己通过纵向对比得出一些结论了。论证的深入到底体现在哪里？

1.单独列出条目是不够的，如果说such as other skills的话，为什么不写出来到底是什么skill？如果说improvements cannot be embodied（这个词用的有问题？） in their work，那到底体现在哪里了？如果说they actually MADE improvements，哪些方面，多大程度？etc.

2．从Daffi的段落里面可以看到非常具体的情景，更不用说范文里面for example的详细——而这样非常能够说明问题。False analogy总是虚的，而说清楚因为A地区成天种棉花B地区成天盖房子从而FALSE analogy才是具体的。同时不仅是场景，其中发展的过程也要给说清楚——看看段落里面在具体场景下面的动态描述（结合着对比），我想应该是很明显的。

3．当然啦，这不是说鼓励大家狂拽一气——GITER后面第二个段落未免太发挥到极致了。一句话能够说清楚的没必要啰嗦5句话，上面给出的一个6分段落就是3句话搞定的。问题仍然是：我必须把必要的内容给予充分的交代，把整个过程为什么出现fallacy分析清楚，这个分析就体现在例如上面提到的一些元素里（当然，也许不止）。大家看看范文，自己也可以琢磨一下：从范文里面能够找到什么样的体现论证充实深入的元素？

4．再次证明：这些元素都不是任何一个版本的号称普适的“模版”能够搞定的。

另外提醒一下MAJOR FLAW的问题，自己写段落的时候小心不要偏掉了：
by happycarol
Even though the arguer can give convincing proof that experienced workers indeed have no apparent improvement in these areas, he could not arbitrarily claim like that. As we know, experience and familiarity is the key to customer-service employees. Those experienced employees, who have worked more than two years, must be competent for their tasks, otherwise they may have been laid off at early time.这一句恐怕很没来由。 That means they may have reached vertex of individual capacity and hardly make mistake in handling calls and customer complaints in ordinary work. How can we still expect those masters make obervious progress in their daily work?这句话就更加违背主旨。既然已经如段落开头所说承认没有apparent improvement，那你行文至此的论断又是在要证明什么呢？呼吁不要苛求老员工？恐怕过于偏离argument主题了吧。 But it cannot ignor the importance of retreat that may train employees not only to deal with daily work but also to properly act in special situation and some emergence such as dangerous compuer virus outburst broadly. In practice, those experienced workers improve their practical capacity of handling with special events by attending the retreat.

另外happymichelle的段落，经过讨论认为是有问题的：
In addition, the arguer fails to convince us the experienced employees do not need to take some trainings. The fact that experienced employees showed little improvements after the retreat does not necessarily follows that it is unworthy to send those experienced workers to the treat 严重的自相矛盾，it is worthy to send them to retreat since they improve very little？ because what kind of the training and whom the treat is focused on were not provided, thus we have good reason to doubt the validity of the results. For example, It is quite possible that the major purpose of this treat is to solve the question of experience, that is to say, to teach the trainees how to gain experience from the experienced workers, in this sense, it is natural that the already experiened employees would improve little compared with the novice. However, if the treat is to focus on the creativity or originality of its employees, the result might be on the contrary. Unless the arguer could recognize and rule out other possiblities relevant to the property of the retreat, the conclusion is unfounded.
感谢Daffi的质疑。

大致先想到这么多，大家有什么想法继续跟帖说！