Argument200 8.10同主题写作 我的第一篇 有拍必回

violayuanUID: 2125310

Argument200 (210 xdf GRE写作教程)  
Roberts and Human Workers
Outline:
1 efficiency:  robots # guarantee efficiency
A, never sick but may go wrong
B, absenteeism and output: unjustifiable causal relationship  =》A,B阻碍生产
C, 列举提高产量的其他可能因素
2 profitable:  more output # more profits : cost and income
            A, maintaining cost VS employ salaries
            B, market situation and sales
3 unemployment instead of improving morale
4 success in outer space # success in factory work

    In this argument the speaker concludes that the successful use of robots on missions to explore outer space in the past 20 years demonstrates that robots could be increasingly used to perform factor work more effectively, efficiently, and profitably than factory workers. For four reasons, these evidences lend little credibility to the speaker’s argument.
    First, increasingly use of robots in factory work does not necessarily indicate more effectiveness or efficiency. In relying on the assumption that robots never get sick, the speaker concludes too hastily that absenteeism could be reduced and could, therefore, bring more efficiency in producing process than employing human workers. But the speaker fails to take into concern that robots may sometimes go wrong either because of program fallacies or direct human operating inappropriateness, which would hamper the producing process and reduce efficiency. Furthermore, less absenteeism does not equates with more output. The arguer simply ignores the possibility that the robots’ performance may not be as effective as human workers. In addition, the arguer fails to take in to account other factors in determining the total production such as the degree of adroitness of specialized workers. Without weighing these aspects, the speaker cannot justify the conclusion that more use of robots will bring about more efficiency.
    Secondly, the arguer fails to build up a causal relationship between the increase use of robots and the increase in profits. The argument simply treats more output as more profits, which is unwarranted. Conversely, productivity is not the only attributes necessary in deciding a factory’s profits. In other words, the situation of merchandise market should be take into account as well as that of labor market. Perhaps the overuse of robots may give rise to oversupply therefore lead to lower price and lower sale. Or perhaps the cost for maintaining the robots exceeds the cost for employing human workers. Without ruling out these alternative factors, the argument’s reasoning linking between using more robots and more profits is unjustifiable.
    Thirdly, the speaker asserts that many workers prefer to shift to more interesting works in supporting the point that the use of robots would improve the morale of factory workers. However, the speaker provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. In fact, the use of robots may give rise to an abundance of jobless workers therefore add instability to society and things may just be the other way around. Accordingly, this evidence itself lacks credible support to the speaker’s theory about the several advantages in using robots.
    Moreover, though the use of robots on missions of exploring outer space is successful, it is not comparable with factory performances. Hence there is no information available to justify and guarantee robots’ achievement in factories.
    In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the speaker must rule out the possibility that the use of robots cost more money and trouble than employing human workers. To better evaluate the arguments, we need more information in weighing the pros and cons of using robots, especially the maintaining cost.
508words

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-12 at 22:49 ]

OB叔UID: 188695

In this argument the speaker concludes that the successful use of robots on missions to explore outer space in the past 20 years demonstrates that robots could be increasingly used to perform factor work more effectively, efficiently, and profitably than factory workers. For four reasons, these evidences lend little credibility to the speaker’s argument.
    First, increasingly use of robots in factory work does not necessarily indicate more effectiveness or efficiency. In relying on the assumption that robots never get sick, the speaker concludes too hastily that absenteeism could be reduced and could, therefore, bring more efficiency in producing process than employing human workers. But the speaker fails to take into concern that robots may sometimes go wrong either because of program fallacies or direct human operating inappropriateness, which would hamper the producing process and reduce efficiency. Furthermore, less absenteeism does not equates with more output. The arguer simply ignores the possibility that the robots’ performance may not be as effective as human workers. In addition, the arguer fails to take in to account other factors in determining the total production such as the degree of adroitness of specialized workers. Without weighing these aspects, the speaker cannot justify the conclusion that more use of robots will bring about more efficiency连词用的很到位，显的层次感很强。
    Secondly, the arguer fails to build up a causal relationship between the increase use of robots and the increase in profits. The argument simply treats more output as more profits, which is unwarranted. Conversely, productivity is not the only attributes necessary in deciding a factory’s profits. In other words, the situation of merchandise market should be take into account as well as that of labor market. Perhaps the overuse of robots may give rise to oversupply therefore lead to lower price and lower sale. Or perhaps the cost for maintaining the robots exceeds the cost for employing human workers. Without ruling out these alternative factors, the argument’s reasoning linking between using more robots and more profits is unjustifiable.这里采用了“列举可能性”（perhaps）的写法，如果能再详尽些，将可能性的数量再加以提高，我个人认为是比较好的。
    Thirdly, the speaker asserts that many workers prefer to shift to more interesting works in supporting the point that the use of robots would improve the morale of factory workers. However, the speaker provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. In fact, the use of robots may give rise to an abundance of jobless workers therefore add instability to society and things may just be the other way around. Accordingly, this evidence itself lacks credible support to the speaker’s theory about the several advantages in using robots.
    Moreover, though the use of robots on missions of exploring outer space is successful, it is not comparable with factory performances. Hence there is no information available to justify and guarantee robots’ achievement in factories.
    In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the speaker must rule out the possibility that the use of robots cost more money and trouble than employing human workers. To better evaluate the arguments, we need more information in weighing the pros and cons of using robots, especially the maintaining cost.结尾段提出改进方法，很不错。
508words

【小结】
连词用的很到位，层次也很清晰。基于你目前的层次，建议你在论述的时候可以适当采用多种论证方法，具体写法可以看看精华区里高手的文章。仔细分析1～2篇，足已。在写作的时候，最好自己有意识的展示各种论述方法，这样会比其他人更有优势

我还想说的是：Argument在考试中只有30分钟，相比较issue而言，难度也是不小的。在平时的写作中就要练习模考。

写的很不错，加油！:)

yogurt4UID: 198389

In this argument the speaker concludes that the successful use of robots on missions to explore outer space in the past 20 years demonstrates that robots could be increasingly used to perform factor work more effectively, efficiently, and profitably than human factory workers. For four reasons,这里不顺啊 these evidences什么evidence(u.n) lend little credibility to the speaker’s argument.
    First, increasingly use of robots in factory work does not necessarily indicate more effectiveness or efficiency. 题目是中的increasing use还不是事实吧，应该不能用这样的句子 In relying on the assumption？ that robots never get sick, the speaker concludes too hastily that absenteeism could be reduced and could, therefore, bring more efficiency in producing process than注意前后结构平行 employing human workers. But the speaker fails to take into concern that robots may sometimes go wrong either because of program fallacies or direct human operating inappropriateness, which would hamper the producing process and reduce efficiency. Furthermore, less absenteeism does not equates with more output. The arguer simply ignores the possibility that the robots’ performance may not be as effective as human workers.这个过了，计算机可能算的没人快么？有也是特殊。 In addition, the arguer fails to take in to account other factors in determining the total production such as the degree of adroitness of specialized workers. Without weighing these aspects, the speaker cannot justify the conclusion that more use of robots will bring about more efficiency.最后有点混乱。
    Secondly, the arguer fails to build up a causal relationship between the increase use of robots and the increase in profits. The argument simply treats more output as more profits, which is unwarranted. Conversely, productivity is not the only attributes necessary in deciding a factory’s profits. In other words, the situation of merchandise market should be take into account as well as that of labor market. Perhaps the overuse of robots may give rise to oversupply therefore lead to lower price and lower sale. Or perhaps the cost for maintaining the robots exceeds the cost for employing human workers. Without ruling out these alternative factors, the argument’s reasoning linking between using more robots and more profits is unjustifiable.
    Thirdly, the speaker asserts that many workers prefer to shift to more interesting works in supporting the point that the use of robots would improve the morale of factory workers. However, the speaker provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. In fact, the use of robots may give rise to an abundance of jobless workers therefore add instability to society and things may just be the other way around. Accordingly, this evidence itself lacks credible support to the speaker’s theory about the several advantages in using robots.
    Moreover, though the use of robots on missions of exploring outer space is successful, it is not comparable with factory performances. Hence there is no information available to justify and guarantee robots’ achievement in factories.这段没有分析啊
    In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the speaker must rule out the possibility that the use of robots cost more money and trouble than employing human workers. To better evaluate the arguments, we need more information in weighing the pros and cons of using robots, especially the maintaining cost.
508words
后面看不下去了。写的很没有条理。
至少要按照题目给出的三点来逐个攻击。A->B->C
你的哪是A，哪是B，哪是C？攻击的顺序又是怎样的？
你的前提论据结论都一把抓了 过多不合理摸班的使用严重影响句子的可读性。
建议多看看范文。第一篇不用担心，可能我说的重了。但是受打击是成功的妈妈。大家一起努力。