标题: SOS!!!快考了.不知道自己的作文是个什么水平,谁能帮我改下作文!不胜感激 [打印本页] 作者: sczsx 时间: 2010-5-5 21:13 标题: SOS!!!快考了.不知道自己的作文是个什么水平,谁能帮我改下作文!不胜感激 不好意思,这篇的题目我找不到了 Merely based on the unfounded assumption and suspicious evidence the author conclude that switching to PDQ pizza will clearly improve satisfaction with their cafeteria and hence increase the cafeteria's profits .To substantiate this statement the arguer points out that PDQ pizza was twice voted the best pizza in the neighboring town of Hamiltonia in an outline survey of Hamiltonia gazatte readers .In addition ,the arguer sited that the branch in their town sells pizzas for only slightly more than their cafeteria currently does and offers free daily delivery .At first glance ,this statement appeals to be somewhat convincing ,however, further reflects reveals that it omits some important concerns that should be addressed to substantiate this statement .
Firstly ,the online survey of Hamiltonia gazatte readers is open to question .Unless the survey sample randomly from a large spectrum ,we can not safely derive at the conclusion .In this case ,we do not know how many people were surveyed and how many responded .This data may be distorting ,it may reveal a tendency but it is not sufficient enough .For example ,if 200 readers were surveyed and 180 responded then it is no doubt that the survey is convincing .However, if only 10 responded ,which renders the survey meaningless .What is more ,maybe the Hamiltonia readers have a preference for PDQ pizza ,they cannot represent all the customers in Hamiltonia .Without ruling out all the factors above ,we cannot derive at the conclusion that PDQ pizza is the most popular brand in Hamiltonia .
Secondly ,even the survey in Hamiltonia is sufficient enough ,we cannot guarantee that this will applicable to the arguer's town ,people in different areas have different flavors preferences. it is not necessarily that the citizen in author's town will like the favor of PDQ pizza .
Lastly .the author commit a fallacy of gratuitous simplification ,just because the brand in our town sells pizzas for only slightly more than our cafeteria currently does and offers free daily delivery the author derive at the conclusion that the PDQ pizza have a big market in their town and provide a good opportunity for their cafeteria .Although these factors contribute to the tendency ,it is insufficient to arrive at the conclusion since many other factors influence the market.
To sum up ,the statement does not constitute a logical because the evidences fail to lend a strong support to what the arguer maintains .To substantiate the statement the author have to provide more information about the flavor preference of the citizens of their town. In addition ,the author would have to demonstrate that the PDQ pizza have a potential market and can provide a good opportunity for the cafeteria .If the statement had included all the factors above ,the statement would have been more through and logically convincing .
还有一篇AI The speaker here argues that government must support the arts but at the same time impose no control over what art is produced .The implicit rationale for government intervention in the arts is that ,without it ,cultural decline and erosion of our social fabric will result .However, I find no empirical evidence to support this argument ,which in any event is unconvincing in light of more persuasive arguments that government should pay no part in either supporting or restricting the arts .
Admittedly art had a significant influence on the whole society , paintings arouse imagination music heal broken heart and purify dirty minds .What is more, art can develop an appreciation for beauty .people learn to appreciate the beauty around them ,in the mountains ,rivers and flowers .Only when you get an ability to enjoy life ,one can live a more fulfilling life . However, subsidizing the arts is neither a proper nor a necessary job for government .
Firstly ,although public health is generally viewed as critical to a society’s very survival and therefore an appropriate concern of government, art requires free expression .restricting artistic expression may in some cases encroach upon the constitutional right of free expression. For example ,soviet union ,forces all the arts it subsidized to follow the party line and squashed those artists who resisted such control .even in democratic countries ,such control is hidden and indirect ,bit still exist .Governmental restriction may chill creativity ,thereby defeating the very purpose of subsidizing the arts .
Secondly ,government cannot possibility play an evenhanded role as arts patron .Inadequate resources call or restrictions, priorities ,and choices .many serious social problems such as environment criminality ,education .For example , even today many people in the western china cannot afford enough food .It is not a wise decision for the government to allocate the limited resources on arts while ignoring the more urgent demand cited above .
Lastly , the government should leave the responsibility of subsidizing art to the public .in fact , today many charitarian are doing an excellent job in supporting the prosperity of arts .
To sum up , while I agree that art play a significant role in developing the society ,government cannot philosophically or economically justify its involvement in the arts ,either by subsidy or sanction responsibility lies with individuals to determine what art has value and to support that art . 我知道看作文是件很痛苦的事情,还是希望哪位好心人帮我看看作者: gshyzCD 时间: 2010-5-5 21:49
明天上前线了，随便说2句。
first secord last 分三段 ，个人觉得层次感还不是很强烈。而是每段2-3个层次，而段落之间再有次主论点+逐层递进，这才是高分作文的行文风格。
