TOPIC: ARGUMENT38 - The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.
"An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."
WORDS: 538 TIME: 00:59:53 DATE: 2008-10-3 20:43:05
The author of the argument claims that people should take Ichthaid to lower the possibility of catching cold and therefore avoid absenteeism. To justify this claim, the arguer cites the fact that people live in East Meria eat a large amount of fish and thus scarcely suffer from cold, moreover, the author also points out that Ichthaid is a good choice to protect people from catching colds. This excerpt seems to be convincing and plausible; however, after close scrutiny, I find it contains logical flaws in several critical respects, as the following discussion shows.
First of all, the arguer assumes too hastily that the low frequency of visit doctors for colds indicates that East Meria people barely catching colds. However, it is not necessarily the case. Common sense informs me that many people do not go to hospital when they catch cold; instead they just take some medicine and rest in bed for one or more days. It is entirely possible that residents in East Meria are reluctant to pay the expensive bill from such an ailment; or perhaps the medical system of East Meria is not well developed and it is not able to serve so many people suffering from cold. Without ruling out these or other similar possibilities, the speaker cannot confidently claim that people in East Meria seldom catch cold.
Secondly, even I concede that residents in East Meria are less likely to catch cold than people live in other region; the speaker cannot confidently draw the conclusion. The argument relies on the unwarranted assumption that the resistance to cold of citizens from East Meria was attributable to the consuming of fish. It is entirely possible that other factors are instead reason for those people's resistance to cold. Perhaps the government of East Meria has carried out an education about how to avoid getting cold for tens of years; or perhaps those residents take part in sports regularly and therefore own a healthier body than people live in other cities. Since the author failed to eliminate these possible alternative explanations, his or her assertion cannot be taken seriously.
Finally, even if eating fish really have a positive impact on people's health, the author's recommendation of Ichthaid was also unsubstantiated. First, Ichthaid was made from fish oil; however, it is possible that the chemical that really benefit people's health is in other part of fish. Moreover, as we all know, the processing of deriving means remove a large portion of substances in fish oil; thus the real nutrition may be removed as well. In short, the author failed to prove that Ichthaid is also capable to reduce the possibility of suffering from cold.
To sum up, the arguer's recommendation of Ichthaid is not well reasoned. To bolster his or her argument, the speaker must prove that residents of East Meria scarcely suffer from cold and whenever they catch cold, they will visit doctors for help. To better support the conclusion, the author is expected to provide more information which can demonstrate the causal relation between eating fish and keeping away from cold. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer should also show that taking Ichthaid can perform as well as eating fish in preventing cold.
Friday, October 03, 2008
第一篇完整的 Argument
TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
WORDS: 505 TIME: 00:55:00 DATE: 2008-10-3 10:00:20
The author of this argument claims that Deerhaven Acres should take the restrictions on landscaping and housepainting just like Brookville did so as to raise the average house prices. To justify this claim the arguer cites a proof that Brookville's property values have risen by putting similar restrictions into practice. This excerpt seems to be convincing and plausible; however, after close scrutiny, I find it contains logical flaws in several critical respects, as the following discussion shows.
First of all, the argument relies on the unwarranted assumption that the price rising of Brookville's houses were attributable to those limitations on landscaping and housepainting. Yet, the only foundation for this causal relation is that there was a correlation between these two phenomena. It is entirely possible that other factors were instead reasons for the increase of real estate prices. It is well known that price is determined the relation of supply and demand. Perhaps Deerhaven suffered from a decline in construction of new houses recently; or perhaps many immigrants have swarmed into Brookville in the recent seven years, and real estate agents raised the prices to earn more profits. Since the argument failed to eliminate these alternative explanations, the arguer's assertion that Brookville's house prices have benefited from constraints on landscaping and housepainting is indefensible.
Secondly, even I concede that the restrictions in Brookville did put a positive effect on the houses' values; another problem with this argument is that analogies between Deerhaven Acres and Brookville are highly suspicious because the author failed to account for possible differences between these two communities. While Brookville's real estate's values raise because of the constraint policies, Deerhaven might not take the advantage of those restrictions. Perhaps Deerhaven's nature environment is not as pleasant as Brookville, so that the simple policies on landscaping and housepainting cannot help to beautify the community. In short, without considering this and other dissimilarities, the arguer cannot convince me that his recommendation for Deerhaven is sound.
Finally, even if these restrictions on house style will also benefit the average property values in Deerhaven, the arguer assumes too hastily that residents of Deerhaven will accept this method, which is, of course unwarranted. Common sense informs me that every single house owner has a trend to keep his or her house unique, which is obviously opposite to the uniform restrictions. Moreover, taking the new policies of housepainting and landscaping will cost a large amount of money, and the arguer did not provide evidence that residents in Deerhaven were ready to pay this bill.
To sum up, the author's conclusion about the constraints on landscaping and housepainting is not well reasoned. To bolster his or her argument, the speaker must prove that these rules are the direct reason for the boost of property values in Brookville. To better support the conclusion, the author is expected to provide more information which can eliminate the possible differences between Deerhaven and Brookville. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer should also demonstrate that citizens in Deerhaven will agree with those policies which may bring inconvenience to them.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
WORDS: 505 TIME: 00:55:00 DATE: 2008-10-3 10:00:20
The author of this argument claims that Deerhaven Acres should take the restrictions on landscaping and housepainting just like Brookville did so as to raise the average house prices. To justify this claim the arguer cites a proof that Brookville's property values have risen by putting similar restrictions into practice. This excerpt seems to be convincing and plausible; however, after close scrutiny, I find it contains logical flaws in several critical respects, as the following discussion shows.
First of all, the argument relies on the unwarranted assumption that the price rising of Brookville's houses were attributable to those limitations on landscaping and housepainting. Yet, the only foundation for this causal relation is that there was a correlation between these two phenomena. It is entirely possible that other factors were instead reasons for the increase of real estate prices. It is well known that price is determined the relation of supply and demand. Perhaps Deerhaven suffered from a decline in construction of new houses recently; or perhaps many immigrants have swarmed into Brookville in the recent seven years, and real estate agents raised the prices to earn more profits. Since the argument failed to eliminate these alternative explanations, the arguer's assertion that Brookville's house prices have benefited from constraints on landscaping and housepainting is indefensible.
Secondly, even I concede that the restrictions in Brookville did put a positive effect on the houses' values; another problem with this argument is that analogies between Deerhaven Acres and Brookville are highly suspicious because the author failed to account for possible differences between these two communities. While Brookville's real estate's values raise because of the constraint policies, Deerhaven might not take the advantage of those restrictions. Perhaps Deerhaven's nature environment is not as pleasant as Brookville, so that the simple policies on landscaping and housepainting cannot help to beautify the community. In short, without considering this and other dissimilarities, the arguer cannot convince me that his recommendation for Deerhaven is sound.
Finally, even if these restrictions on house style will also benefit the average property values in Deerhaven, the arguer assumes too hastily that residents of Deerhaven will accept this method, which is, of course unwarranted. Common sense informs me that every single house owner has a trend to keep his or her house unique, which is obviously opposite to the uniform restrictions. Moreover, taking the new policies of housepainting and landscaping will cost a large amount of money, and the arguer did not provide evidence that residents in Deerhaven were ready to pay this bill.
To sum up, the author's conclusion about the constraints on landscaping and housepainting is not well reasoned. To bolster his or her argument, the speaker must prove that these rules are the direct reason for the boost of property values in Brookville. To better support the conclusion, the author is expected to provide more information which can eliminate the possible differences between Deerhaven and Brookville. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer should also demonstrate that citizens in Deerhaven will agree with those policies which may bring inconvenience to them.
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Google 时光机
2001年，七年以前，那时候，我们的世界是什么样子的呢？
七年，似乎很遥远
没有信息安全工程学院，没有IPOD，还有世贸双子楼，还有塔利班。
七年，似乎又很近
回想起来，似乎又是昨天，我还是个上初二的小P孩，还迷恋着香酥鸡，还在为根号169等于多少而困惑。
七年前，有多少你现在习以为常的东西根本就不存在了呢？
七年后，有多少你曾经耳濡目染的东西早已灰飞烟灭了呢？
看看吧，
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
2008年9月30日
今天又是荒废的一天，上午九点多起来的，马上刷邮箱，很高兴，Dr. Wang 给我回了邮件，让我觉得放心很多，接下去继续写创新项目的申请表，基本上都是按照自己的思路写的，没有大段大段地去抄已经有的一些部分，所以就篇幅而言很简短，不像之前的几次，一下子就拷贝一堆自己完全不懂的东西。
下午睡了一大觉，一直到五点钟才起来，梦里还是想着申请项目的事情，确实，这次申请的准备已经弄了很长时间了，我也把我所能想到的一切资源都利用上的。做了最好的准备，不知道，结果会是什么样子。
到晚上把申请书写地差不多了，觉得很高兴，下载了Hero最新一集给看了，没什么特别的感觉，只是希望等下一集。
明天要开始回到准备GRE的征程了，现在开始发现，时间又很紧了。大概是最近分心的事情太多，思想上很少去照顾GRE，但不得不说，这个考试还是非常重要的，AW要是拿不到4.0，现在很多其他的努力，都会因为木桶相应而付之东流，这，是不行的。
现在是2008年9月30日，晚上8点58分，接下来3个小时里，我要把Open Swan的VPN实验做好。
下午睡了一大觉，一直到五点钟才起来，梦里还是想着申请项目的事情，确实，这次申请的准备已经弄了很长时间了，我也把我所能想到的一切资源都利用上的。做了最好的准备，不知道，结果会是什么样子。
到晚上把申请书写地差不多了，觉得很高兴，下载了Hero最新一集给看了，没什么特别的感觉，只是希望等下一集。
明天要开始回到准备GRE的征程了，现在开始发现，时间又很紧了。大概是最近分心的事情太多，思想上很少去照顾GRE，但不得不说，这个考试还是非常重要的，AW要是拿不到4.0，现在很多其他的努力，都会因为木桶相应而付之东流，这，是不行的。
现在是2008年9月30日，晚上8点58分，接下来3个小时里，我要把Open Swan的VPN实验做好。
Thursday, September 25, 2008
进驻实验室了
冷空气终于如期而至，给上海降降温，今天更高兴的是，我进驻108房间了~这里的学长学姐都很不错，很客气：）
有纯水，有空凋~有“有线网”~桌子很宽敞~对面就是老师们的办公室~可以经常去问问题~也很安静~貌似开放到很晚（据说可以通宵），无论如何，比图书馆强多啦！只是没有一堆书可以看，以后要经常去借书了。
有纯水，有空凋~有“有线网”~桌子很宽敞~对面就是老师们的办公室~可以经常去问问题~也很安静~貌似开放到很晚（据说可以通宵），无论如何，比图书馆强多啦！只是没有一堆书可以看，以后要经常去借书了。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
