[YB2] 7月10号作业 by lossingzone

lossingzoneUID: 2519545

注：修改过拼写和一些明显的语法错误
TOPIC: ISSUE30 - "The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that everyone has more leisure time."
WORDS: 590
TIME: 01:20:00
DATE: 2009-7-10 21:15:49

Why do computer experts try their best to make computer as quickly as possible? What cars exist for since we can ride a bike to go to work? It's not just for fun to pursue advance in technology and science, but more fundamentally, for efficiency which can release us from many cumbersome work. Ironically, it is surprised that even we are free from handwork and have many powerful machines working for us today; we fall in the dilemma of less leisure time.

Actually, the pursuit of efficiency is part of human nature. It's well known that material demand is our basic demand. It's the instinct of human beings to pursuit a more comfortable life. When our ancestors were still living in caves, they had tried to give up stick and make use of metal to hunt animals, since they found that tools made from metal were more powerful and hence more effective in hunting. The intuition of survival, in essence, spurred them to search for more effective weapons. In modern times, there is no need for us to worry about the attack of wild animals anymore. However, we do have a strong desire to promote the development of science and technology, since advance in technology do make us more effective to deal with various affairs. Thanks to the amazing machines today, a travel from Alaska to Australia just takes us half a day nowadays, while it was an absurd dream two thousand years ago.

Moreover, it's not only the demand for more comfortable life that motivate people pursue efficiency, but the dramatically competition also stimulates us to do it. As a contemporary saying goes, time is money. Efficiency, in some sense, determines the existence and development of an individual, a company, even a country. How can a company profit well if its efficiency is much lower than the opponents’? Why do western countries have more advantages in various fields than those African countries? Because these western countries own more advanced technologies and have much higher efficiency.

Admittedly, the pursuit of efficiency is not without any negative consequences. As a matter of fact, many problems rise up to us accompany with the higher and higher efficiency. Some countries, especially developing countries, increase efficiency at the cost of environment; some companies achieve this by forcing their employees to work more hours while giving them less payment. All these are partly due to the pursuit of efficiency.

Despite the above sad affairs, the more frustrated thing is the rapid increased efficiency doesn't bring us more leisure time. It's common that we stay in the room and immerse in a pile of documents even in the weekends, not mention overtime work. Yes, we do have computers calculate complicate equations for us; however, we pay more time in analyzing and modeling to guarantee that our company can profit much. There is no doubt that cars, planes and other modern transportation means save us much time from one place to another place, yet the time saved doesn't bring us more leisure time at most cases. It's a tragedy, I think. Although the advance in efficiency enable us make more fantasy creations, most of us even have enough leisure time to share them as well as the beautiful nature.
It's the time that we human reflect ourselves now, I think. We are not living for chasing mass materials to lead an extravagant life; instead, we should seek something more meaningful, such as helping others, exploring the nature, etc. Therefore, the origin why we request higher efficiency and the way we achieve it should be re-examined.


TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.

"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
WORDS: 515
TIME: 00:52:32
DATE: 2009-7-10 22:20:55

The arguer concluded that small, nonprofit hospitals can provide patients with cheaper and better treatment than large, for-profit ones, by comparing the average length of a patient's stay, the cure rate, average employees per patient and the complaints about service of small, nonprofit hospitals in the town of Saluda and large, for-profit hospitals in the city Megaville. It sounds substantial. However, by careful analyzing, some flaws can be found and hence the conclusion is unconvincing.

First of all, it is not sufficed to assert that the small nonprofit hospitals in Saluda are of better quality than those large for-profit hospitals in Megaville. It's true that the average length of a patient's stay is much shorter. However, there is the possibility that the patients go to these small hospitals for treatment of small diseases, while they go to large hospitals when they get heavy illness. It's natural that small diseases require much shorter time to stay in hospital and hence the average time a patient stay in large hospitals is much longer than that of small hospitals. In a word, the length of stay time can not be a substantial support of small hospitals' good quality. Similarly, the lower cure rate and more complaints don't equal lower quality. Small hospitals usually treat those patients get small diseases such as cold and fever which are easy to cure, while large hospitals have more patients who are in danger of losing lives. As a result, it's not surprised that large hospitals have lower cure rate and more complaints anymore. Unless the arguer provides us with more information about types of patients, he/she can not draw a convincing conclusion.

Even we concede that small hospitals in Saluda if of better quality, it is not necessarily that they are more economical. Does nonprofit equal less charge? It could be right in many cases, however there are exceptions. For example, if these small hospitals don't have enough financial support and have to make a living by themselves, they would charge more to get money to maintain the hospital. Since these are small hospitals, they don't have effective management and hence the cost is high.

Even nonprofit hospitals in Saluda are more economical and provide better service than large hospitals in Megaville, there is another fatal flaw. Is it enough to extent it to other districts? There are many small nonprofit hospitals as well as many large for-profit ones. Can the arguer guarantee the credence of his/her conclusion? Absolute he/she cannot. Just take hospitals in China for example. There are many small hospitals in small towns of China, which provide limited service of small diseases. What's worse, doctors in these hospitals cannot even cure those common diseases such as cold and fever! Large hospitals, in some sense, however, do provide substantial treatment for many illnesses. Therefore, it's logically flawed for the arguer to extent the special case to other districts.

In sum, arguer should provide more information to make it clear that whether small nonprofit hospitals are more economical and of better quality as well as. Moreover, the conclusion would not hold universally.

忘了密码的EUID: 2354139

我觉得写得相当好啊 基本没改