Issue38 Argument70 2007-3-8 小鸡快跑

longxuUID: 2290268

TOPIC: ISSUE38 - "In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books."
WORDS: 557          TIME: 0:45:00          DATE: 2007-3-8

Is reading books is not as vital as it was in the era of television for the reason that people are able to learn by watching television as much as from the books, as the speaker claims? I concede that along with the development of economy and technology, there are more and more information and knowledge which television can present us. However, we should still place enough emphasis on reading book.

One of the reasons why I fundementally agree with the assertion of the speaker is that It is the television that make it possible for us to obtain a geat amounts of domestic and international information and knowledge while we are at home. Moreover, we can watch movie and Soap shows at the same time for recreation. In short, the television, which is part-and-parcel of the day, brings us a great number of changes in our life style and the content of daily life.

Another reason is that there are diverse choice on television, which enable us to have a deluge of choices for our own favorite program, that is television can make avaiable many channels for us. So, it is convenient for us to obtain what I could not get in the real life. For instance, given that I am busy with my work all the days and have no enough holidays to take on the tour, I can know a great deal of fun in the channel which is intended for tourist. Therefore, television can offer us what we cannot obtain in the real life.

On the other hand, television have also some disadvantages on some grouds compared to books.

Learning is a proces of thinking alone in that we have to think with books on the issues which are confusing us quietly and rationally. Yet, television with many other choices will not be conducive for us to focus much on the problems. What is more, learning need stop for a moment to digest and assimilate the new knowledge and information, while it is impossible for television having a huge number of audience at the same time to stop for a while just for one individual. Therefore, books are still the most important resouce for learnig and study.

Television is a sort of tool which is used to disseminate information that is difficult for us to store them and to review them later as we prefer. But, book can help us review at any time as we want, for the reason that books are available for us all the time even if there is no electricity and television net. And, we cannot know from book many accidents and events which were recorded by ancient people. Consequently, book is a media to connect people between our time and the previous time while television cannot make it possible if there is no video materials.

Besides, the health issues are also important facters for us. Television bring us too much radiation by the screen which is just in front of us all the time when we are watch television. And, the problems with eyes is more and more serious for our children of the day.

To sum up, television is of great importance in our modern society to propagate information and knowledge while book equally is a significantly vital method for our learning new knowledge and course.


TOPIC: ARGUMENT70 - Studies show that in 70 percent of traffic accidents, at least one driver involved is less than 10 miles from home when the accident occurs. This statistic indicates that drivers have a tendency to drive incautiously when they are close to home, probably because familiar surroundings give them a false sense of security. Thus, the places where people feel safest are the places where they are in fact at greatest risk of serious injury.
WORDS: 446          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-3-8

The arguer claims that the places where people feel safest are the places where they are at greatest danger of serious injury. To justify the conclusion the argument present studies showing that most of traffic accidents happen with one driver who is less than 10 miles from home. However, the assumptions are dubious on some grounds, rendering the argurment unpersuasive as it stands.

First of all, the arguer unfairly assumes that one driver who is less than 10 miles from home is important evidence to support the conclusion. Yet, lacking convincing information about whether 10 miles is long enough for most of the subjects for the studies. It is entirely likely that the places which is relevant to the studies are so small that residents there just work and live within 10 miles.  Thus, unless the arguer present more information about the drivers who is involved in the accidents, we cannot accept the reliability of the assumption from the arguer.

Next point, the arguer fails to offer clear information about the studies about the size and makeup. There are one or more possible alternatives for the results of the studies. In that the whole number of the accidents is not provided,  70 percent of traffic accidents, as the case may be, are not a great number for our attention. Or perhaps, the 70 percent of traffice accidents we concerned do not result in the serious injury. Therefore, lacking more information about whether the studies can be represetive the whole possibilities, it is impossible for us to assess the reliability of the studies or to make any informed recommendation.

Last but not least, the conclusion that the places where people feel safest are the places where they are at greatest danger of serious injury is dubious and still cannot be interpreted. It is possible that most of people will feel safe in most of places, it is not reasonable for arguer to conclude such recommendation to us. Familar surroudings can indeed give us fatual the sense of safty which could not only be an illusion. If the arguer cannot demonstrate substantial evidence about the sense of safty when people feel in the familiar surrroundings, it is absurd for argure's conclusion.

To sum up, the argument is indeed logical unsound with the existing studies and the flawed assumptions. To better assess it, I need to know that whether the studies can be represetive the whole possibilities and that whether the sense of safty when people feel in the familiar surrroundings can bring great risk of serious injury. Besides, the arguer should also present more information about the drivers who is involved in the accidents concerned in the studies.

[ 本帖最后由 longxu 于 2007-3-8 14:37 编辑 ]