帮改issue
同学们可以把issue发给我，[color=red]大字体，带提纲,[/color]我只是看思路——跑不跑题，逻辑合不合理，论证完不完整。或者有思路不明确可以大家一起讨论。注意：只看思路，不看文辞。思路错了文笔再好也浪费不是，所以从基础做起吧。
[[i] 本帖最后由 手动时代 于 2009-11-1 18:14 编辑 [/i]] [font=Calibri]7The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper. [/font]
[font=Calibri][/font]
[font=Calibri]"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."
[/font]
[font=Calibri][/font]
[font=Calibri][/font]
[font=Calibri][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black]In this argument, the author recommends that residents vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, than Frank from Clearview(C) town council in the next mayoral election to improve the environment. To uphold his/her recommendation, the [/color][color=black]author poses that the number of factories has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients in respiratory illnesses during the past year. This argument obviously is unpersuaded with some logical flaws.[/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black][/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black][color=black]First, the author assumes that if Ann won the election, she will work on environment problems. However, without information about her work plans, the assumption may not be true. If Ann tends to attract and build up more factories to rise up the economy in C, the result could be completely opposed to[/color] residents'will. And the environment could be even worse[/color][color=black] let alone to improve the environment and solve problems.Although Frank is a member in council, while Ann is a member of Good Earth Coalition, there is no information pointing out that he will not solve the environment problems. The author gives no information to bolster his/her conclusion so that it is unwarranted.[/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black]Then, the author falsely assumes that factories make the environment worse in C and the increase in respiratory illnesses is due to environment getting worse. No statistic evidences can justify that factories in C do not obey laws and discharge their waste air and water directly into environment. And no statistic information could attest the increase in respiratory illnesses is due to worse environment. Some certain kind of respiratory illnesses may be epidemic in last year and render the increase in patients.[color=red][/color][/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black][/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black]Finally, the author cannot convince me that residents vote for Ann is due to she will solve environment problems. Ann may have some other plans about how to increase economy and solve residents' cared-most problems so that she will win the election. The author just omits some other factors why residents vote for Ann while they could be the key reason in Ann's won.[/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black][/color][/font]
[font=Calibri][color=black]In summary, the author leaves so many logical fallacies that his/her conclusion is not persuaded as it stands. To better assess the conclusion, the author is appreciated to provide more details about how the environment is ruined after factories doubled in C and whether it is related to the increase in respiratory illnesses. More information about Ann's and Frank's work plan is needed to justify if this kind information will lend support to the author's conclusion.[/color][/font]
回复 1# 手动时代 的帖子
这是一个好主意~~~我也加入~ 对不起没说清湖，只改issue [b]170.The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers,artists, or scientists, but the general welfare of all its people.[/b]When asked about the issue the generalwelfare of all the people play the most crucial role to judge the greatness ofa nation, of course, I agree the great nation should aim at general welfare ofits people; in contrast, I oppose the former part of the statement that theachievements on policy, art, or technology depart from the steps to establish agreat nation, because so absolute is it that in most cases it can be disproved.
To begin with the definition of the generalwelfare, in my idea one main element of the general welfare basely is public healthand safety, and a high standard of living. While curiously the goal of sciencedevelopment, whatever in the area of health science, technology, physics, and engineering,is to benefit all the human being in the standard of living. In 1928 SirAlexander Fleming, British bacteriologist and Nobel laureate, found penicillinby chance. This amazing mold can effectively inhibit many deathful bacteria andlater was comprehensively used in medical treatment. Since that people don'tfear the diseases like Black Death, the live span lengthens and the populationrises. From the instance in British, the prominent achievement in health carecontributed to enhanced the people physical well-being, thus could be seem asthe strong prove that scientific achievement meliorate the welfare of thenation’s citizens. In sum, I bolster the claim that the achievements ofscientists bring the aims, promoting all human well-being, into fruition.
Besides the reason why I deem theachievement of artists is also vital to evaluate the greatness of a nation isthat the human overall which I think is another important concern of generalwelfare need artistic achievement like plays, operas, dramas, films, music youname it. There is a famous saying by P.B. Shelley that a great poem is afountain overflowing with the waters of wisdom and delight. Indeed, no one doubtsthat the maestros have played key role of supplying the fodder of mentalenjoyment and lifting the human spirit in all society. Take William Shakespeareas example. All he remained become the endless treasure for later generations toadapt and innovate, and the source of inspiration, creativity, and imagination.As the result of William Shakespeare’s great contribution, people get relax andenjoyments from these dramas or plays which make us feel real existing withhumanity in this world. Therefore, I believe the achievement of artists shouldbe considered as the necessary indictor of a great nation due to the generalwelfare including both satisfaction on substance and mental content.
Perhaps this is arbitrary to judge thegreatness of a nation according only to the two aspects I mentions in aboveparagraphs, for of particular cases are many way in which the scientificattainments adversely have placed the limits or obstacles on the generalwelfare. As we all known, the global warming is the severest and largest rangeof negative effect caused by the industrial development. Immediately thefollowing ideas come to mind: a great nation should do their best to controland prevent these things, thereby the political leaders work. The effectivepolicy may hardly eradicate but prevent these negative influences deterioratingor try our best to make up. Obviously, that is why I hold the opinion that theachievement of rulers, scientists, and artists as integral contribution is thesurest indictor of a great nation.
Taking into account of all these factors, Ireach the conclusion the end product of individual achievements aim at theprosperity of a nation, even the whole world and the prosperity of the world isequal to the general welfare of all the people. 请注意红字啊。。。。
页:
[1]