备考首页 > 备考文章 > 雷哥GRE写作名师精选范文——Argument

雷哥GRE写作名师精选范文——Argument

头像
chuck 2018-08-23
阅读(978)

本文作者:写作逻辑洞悉大师:ReginaQQ图片20180822161231.png

PS:本文由老师全英文的写作,水平不够的同学请提升水平再尝试阅读理解哦!


Example44


The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a journal on environmental issues.


"Over the past year, the Crust Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over 10,000 square miles of  land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in  pollution and, since West Fredonia is the home of several endangered animal species, in  environmental disaster. But such disasters can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase  products that are made with CCC's copper unless the company abandons its mining plans."


Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be  sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are if the  assumptions prove unwarranted.



逻辑图分析;


blob.png 


blob.png 

CCC's mining activities do not necessarily lead to pollution and environmental disater.


We do not know what fraction of the 10,000 square miles of land will be used for CCC's mining activities.(数据问题)

We konw nothing about mining technology of CCC.(结论无据)

We do not know what portion of CCC's land in inhabited by endangered animals.(结论无据)


blob.png

blob.png 

The  author fails to demonstrate the critical assumption that most consumers can reliably distinguish products that are made with CCC's copper.(无端假设)

The auther fails to consider whether most consumers are willing to cooperate in the boycoot.(无端假设)

The  auther ignores the possibility that other measures could also be taken to prevent the hamful result.(另有他因  通过列举可能导致环境灾害的其他原因)

The auther hastily assumes that the proposed boycott will sufficiently prevent pollution and enviromental disaster.(另有他因  通过列举可能实现该目的的其他原因)


First, the underlying assumption that the deterioration of environment and  disturbance to endangered animals will inevitably occur is open to doubt.Ten thousand square miles are, without any doubt, so large an area that  almost makes up the total territory of New York City. There is likelihood  that only a very small proportion of the land will be used for mining.


Furthermore, with the advanced technology of waste disposal and  environmental-friendly recycling, the pollution, if any, can be so  insignificant that almost has no negative effect on the environment.


Even if the exploitation is indeed very heavy, the arguer does not inform us  to what extent the mining areas and the habitat of endangered species  overlap. If(假设法) they are located far away from each other, the mining would have little impact on local animals. Without taking these factors into consideration,  the arguer could not successfully convince us that CCC’s mining process will  bring about horrible results, and the boycott would be totally unnecessary in  this case.


Second, the feasibility of the arguer's proposal can also be cast doubt on. The proposal could be smoothly carried out only if the consumers can reliably distinguish products that are made with CCC’s copper. We all know that only the brand of the final producer will be engraved to a product. For instance,(例证法)li'z if a copper lock is manufactured, consumers can only identify the brand of the lock company. It is unlikely that a nonprofessional consumer can tell the material supplier of a certain product.


Even assuming that consumers can effectively recognize copper products made with CCC’s copper, and that the vast majority of such consumers can be gathered by certain means, whether all of them are willing to cooperate in the boycott is still not guaranteed.(概括消费者的合作意愿) It is highly possible that(推测法) most consumers care more about the quality and cost of a product while little about environmental problems. If the consumers cannot distinguish products using CCC’s copper, or they simply have no interest in the boycott, the proposal would be meaningless at all, let alone prevent environmental problems.


In conclusion, the argument is unpersuasive(E) and the arguer should  provide additional information to demonstrate that CCC   will cause a  disastrous effect on the environment of West Fredonia once its mining  plan is carried out. The arguer also needs to prove that the proposed  boycott is not only practically feasible, but also sufficient and necessary  for the arguer’s purpose.(S)

标签图标 GRE作文
收藏
图标 报错
评论标题图标 网友评论
(评论数:0
用户头像

游客

热门文章

关闭图标
纠错文章
错误描述
GRE培训

高效提分,预见你想象的高分!

2018 gre.viplgw.cn All Rights Reserved 京ICP备16000003号-3 京公网安备11010802017681 免责声明
雷哥GRE(gre.viplgw.cn),GRE培训|GRE考试|GRE在线课程|GRE网课|GRE机经真题_雷哥GRE培训官网 本网站提供的OG&150真题&真题内容,其版权均为ETS所有,Please reference the OG。 本网站中所提供的magoosh、Kaplan、princeton、NO、CQ、CHP、猴哥等题目内容来源互联网网友,仅供学习者交流免费使用。 本网站所提供的知识库内容,部分来源于雷哥GRE整理发布,版权归greonline.cn所有,仅供学习者交流免费使用。部分来源于互联网,版权归原作者所有,仅供学习者交流免费使用。