【辉太郎杀G大队】7/9作业by hdsf2003

hdsf2003UID: 2351462

Argument 165

The arguer gave a conclusion that no chemicals inducing health problems are contained in the cans. He supported his statement by presenting three points:(1) eight million cans of tuna were returned, which seems a good selection of sample;(2) five of eight common problem chemicals were not found;(3) other three are often found in canned foods. At the first glance, the statement seems to be well grounded. But when we make a deeper analysis, it is easy to notice that there are many flaws in this statement.

To begin with, it is doubtful whether the result of tested samples can present the information of all returned cans. As we know, though eight million cans were returned, it is impossible to test all of them. This is an issue of effective selection. Maybe the tested samples are from the same place or the same factory and it is true that no obvious chemical containing. But we still have the skeptical that other cans have toxic chemicals. Therefore, it is necessary to make sure that the tested samples are from different places, factory and produced in different time.

Providing that the sample selection is totally believable, the authority of the test result is still not beyond doubt, for the arguer only mentioned eight common chemicals. Perhaps there are many other chemicals blending in the foods. There is no evident to exclude this possibility. Perhaps other chemicals have a significant affection on our health.

Furthermore, it is irresponsible for arguer to ignore three naturally containing problem chemicals. Though the arguer knew that these three chemicals can be harmful to our body, he did not give a positive respond to solve this visible problem.
As an educated individual, no one can accept such a ridiculous conclusion.

To sum up, the arguer gave a credible statement that the cans are safe foods. In order to practically assure the health of consumers and present us a well grounded conclusion, the argue has to go further work as following: (1) making sure that the testing method obeys the basic principle of statistics; (2) whether there is an existence of unique noxious chemicals;(3) persuading the food producers to replace or modify the current material of can.










Issue 203


"The best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and women that the society chooses as its heroes or its heroines."


Heroes and heroines frequently appear on the TV screen, and we are used to considering them as the characteristic persons in our society. To some extent, heroes and heroines actually reflect the partial characters of our society.

Heroes and Heroines usually stand for strong and endless power. They always bring us something amazing, even unbelievable. What invariably happen in a movie is that heroes or heroines beat back our enemies and relight our life through a painful fight. There is a close resemblance to our society. We human beings always come across some disasters and come to the dangerous edge at some time. But these disasters had never brought us down though we paid a severe price. In fact, we are all heroes or heroines.

But we never miss the sense that heroes and heroines show their other aspect-weakness. Heroes and heroines sometimes drop tears behind common people for they don't want others to know that they also very common. Despite their disguise, we can still find the little remain on their pale face. To varying degrees, all of us have the time when we feel sad or depress. So does the society. The environmental problem is such a typical example. The beautiful earth is our lovely mother but she is so weak when we produce so much toxic gas and pollute the blue seas without realizing that these have hurt her so heavy.

On the other hand, society is much more complicated than the plot in movie. There are many problems which a hero or heroin cannot solve. Human is only one of the various components of society. Other breeds are equally important as our human. We always ignore the importance of these creatures so that some of them die out and the balance of society is disturbed. It is our false to disregard the existing of our neighbors. As we know, giant pandas are mere species, and maybe some years later they will never move ponderously in front of us and never bring us happiness if we still to act according our own styles for profit. Only paying more attention to these mere species and giving them a friendly environment, we can then call us heroes or heroines.
                                    
In conclusion, heroes and heroines possess some features of society. But we are only part of society so that it is not enough to learn it simply though heroes and heroines. There are many tough issues, beyond the ability of heroes and heroines, which are waiting to be dealt with by ourselves.

AliciaSunUID: 2660743

Argument 165

The arguer gave a conclusion that no chemicals inducing health problems are [url=]contained[/url][H1]
in the cans. He supported his statement by presenting three points:(1) eight million cans of tuna were returned, which [url=]seems[/url][H2]
a good selection of sample;(2) five of eight common [url=]problem chemicals[/url][H3]
were not found;(3) other three [url=]are[/url][H4]
often found in canned foods. At the first glance, the statement seems to be well grounded. But when we make a deeper analysis, it is easy to notice that there are many flaws in this statement.

To begin with, it is doubtful whether the result of tested samples can present the information of all returned cans. As we know, though eight million cans were returned, it is impossible to test all of them. This is an issue of effective selection. Maybe the tested samples are from the same place or the same factory and it is true that no obvious chemical [url=]containing[/url][H5]
. But we still have the [url=]skeptical[/url][H6]
that other cans have toxic chemicals. Therefore, it is necessary to make sure that the tested samples are from different places, [url=]factory[/url][H7]
and [url=]produced[/url][H8]
in different time.

Providing that the sample selection is totally believable, the authority of the test result is still not beyond doubt, for the arguer only mentioned eight common chemicals. Perhaps there are many other chemicals blending in the foods. There is no [url=]evident[/url][H9]
to exclude this possibility. Perhaps other chemicals have a significant [url=]affection[/url][H10]
on our health.

Furthermore, it is irresponsible for arguer to ignore three naturally containing problem chemicals. Though the arguer knew that these three chemicals can be harmful to our body, he did not give a positive respond to solve this visible problem.
[url=]As an educated individual, no one can accept such a[/url][url=]ridiculous [/url][H11]
conclusion[H12]
.

To sum up, the arguer gave a credible statement that the cans are safe [url=]foods[/url][H13]
. In order to practically assure the health of consumers and present us a well grounded conclusion, [url=]the argue has to go further work[/url][H14]
as following: (1) making sure that the testing method obeys the basic principle of statistics; ([url=]2[/url][H15]
) whether there is an existence of unique noxious chemicals;(3) persuading the food producers to replace or modify the current material of can.










Issue 203


"The best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and women that the society chooses as its heroes or its heroines."


Heroes and heroines frequently appear on the TV [url=]screen[/url][H16]
, and we [url=]are used to[/url][H17]
considering them as the characteristic persons in our society. To some extent, heroes and heroines actually reflect the partial characters of our [url=]society[/url][H18]
.

Heroes and Heroines usually stand for strong and endless power. They always bring us something amazing, even unbelievable. [url=]What invariably happen in a movie is that heroes or heroines beat back our enemies and relight our life through a painful fight[/url][H19]
. There is a close [url=]resemblance[/url][H20]
to our society. We human beings always [url=]come across[/url][H21]
some disasters and come to the dangerous edge at some time. But these disasters had never brought us down though we paid a [url=]severe[/url][H22]
price. In fact, we are all heroes or [url=]heroines[/url][H23]
.

But we never miss the sense that heroes and heroines show their other aspect-weakness. Heroes and heroines sometimes drop tears behind common people for they don't want others to know that they also very common. Despite their disguise, we can still find the little remain on their pale face. To varying degrees, all of us have the time when we feel sad or depress. So does the society. The environmental problem is such a typical example. The beautiful earth is our lovely mother but she is so weak when we produce so much toxic gas and pollute the blue seas without realizing that these have hurt her so [url=]heavy[/url][H24]
[H25]
.

On the other hand, society is much more complicated than the plot in movie. There are many problems which a hero or heroin cannot solve. Human is only one of the various components of society. Other breeds are equally important as our human. We always ignore the importance of these creatures so that some of them die out and the balance of society is disturbed. It is our false to disregard the existing of our neighbors. As we know, giant pandas are mere species, and maybe some years later they will never move ponderously in front of us and never bring us happiness if we still [url=]to[/url][H26]
act according our own styles for profit. Only paying more attention to these mere species and giving them a friendly environment, we can then call us heroes or heroines.


In conclusion, heroes and heroines possess some features of society. But we are only part of society so that it is not enough to learn it simply though heroes and heroines. There are many tough issues, beyond the ability of heroes and heroines, which are waiting to be dealt with by ourselves.

文章的主旨其实是很好的，最后把高度提高到人们本身才是英雄这个高度，很赞。但是我想说的是，这跟issue题目有点点偏了，或者是缺乏有效合理的过渡。另外还是词汇量的问题啦，要多背背单词的说，一起努力！

[H1]时态不对拉



[H2]时态不对 again



[H3]Problem chemicals? 很怪哦，。。换个词吧。。换什么我也想不到。。



[H4]时态考试的时候很容易被扣分哦。。。



[H5]Are contained 会不会好一点



[H6]Skeptical是个形容词吧。。



[H7]Factory是什么意思？是说测试的机构么〉我觉得没写清楚。。



[H8]既然主语是test samples的话，produce就不是很合适了，或者主语改成test examples,或者produce改成verified.



[H9]Evidence…



[H10]Affection我觉得是不是偏向于好一点的影响呢？effection好不好？



[H11]这个词太重了



[H12]这句话我觉得写得太重了。。。有点人身攻击拉




[H13]我觉得这句话没说完，应该加上，of which we can find so many flaws in his reasoning. 因为你是要总结嘛，那就要说清楚你的立场，而不是强调别人的立场。这样子写好象你支持arguer似的，，，对不？



[H14]这句话好像也没什么错，但是预感有点问题，the argue has to be further represented会不会好一点？



[H15]既然是并列关系，结构最好一致吧我觉得。所以这个地方写proving whether会不会好一点



[H16]screen用的不对。。tv show或者tv program.不是出现在屏幕上，是节目上。



[H17]Accustomed会比be used to 更书面，作文里面最好不要用口语的东东。。




[H18]我觉得开头没写完整，下面既然是要部分反对的，开头就应该把这两个意思都写进去。。。




[H19]这句话写得很好



[H20]这个词很好，可是我不确定时不是这么用啊。。。觉得读起来不太对的感觉，建议再查一下。



[H21]没有go through 好吧？



[H22]Severe price? Or severe sacrifice? Or expensive price?




[H23]这一段话要论证的东西是什么？跟issue题目有什么关系？我觉得没有达到你想说的目的。。。



[H24]这个例子写得不错。赞一个。



[H25]这一段的主题还是不明确。总论点是说，研究社会性格的最好方法是研究英雄性格。那么你这段，我猜是想说，社会性格也有软弱的一面。那么这一面，可以还是不可以通过英雄的性格研究出来呢？英雄是有弱点的，他们会落泪，那么分析他们这些弱点，可否知道社会的弱点呢？




[H26]To应该去掉

hdsf2003UID: 2351462

AliciaSun改的非常仔细，对于这次的Issue，我都不知道怎么分析，分析好到动笔都快过了十分钟，时间不够用，我也觉得还没有把问题提出来，文章就结束了。看你的文章，就发现你能多层次分析问题，这一点我一下子还真学不会  哈哈。。。

对于Argument, 自己觉得要点是把握住了，毕竟比issue好下手，如你提到的一样，开头段的时态很乱，看来以后陈述人家的东西一般要用过去时态，只有自己的观点才用一般时态。

非常感谢AliciaSun的细致分析，让我觉得很有必要把issue重新写一次

hdsf2003UID: 2351462

顺便问句，你怎么可以在45分钟内写出这么字呢  我每次字数基本都在450左右，不然再多肯定超时。。。

词汇，还真是个大问题，背的不够深，只认得，写的时候脑子里就找不到了。。。