[46] [The following appeared in a health magazine published in Corpora.]”Medical experts say that only one-quarter of Corpora's citizens meet the current standards for adequate physical fitness, even though twenty years ago, one-half of all of Corpora's citizens met the standards as then defined. But these experts are mistaken when they suggest that spending too much time using computers has caused a decline in fitness. Since overall fitness levels are highest in regions of Corpora where levels of computer ownership are also highest, it is clear that using computers has not made citizens less physically fit. Instead, as shown by this year's unusually low expenditures on fitness-related products and services, the recent decline in the economy is most likely the cause, and fitness levels will improve when the economy does." [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 for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.]
This argument is a combination of a multiple assertions. Considering the judgments from the medical experts, the writer implicitly concedes the issue of the decreasing fitness in Corpora. Then he considers the computer not a reason for the unfitness issue due to the region data, and avers this unfitness issue is actually caused by the recession of the economics. While some points are worth ruminating in this long reasoning process, this argument is rife with holes and vague points due to the purely subjective profiling the writer makes.
First off, the writer presumes the fact of a decrease in health condition in Corpora is true only due to the testimony of those experts. However, there are obvious flaws in the proof from the experts. They simply make this assertion via a comparison between the current conditions with the new standard and the past one with the old criteria 20 years ago. Does this analogue make sense? After all, there has been a large gap between these two situations, and the standard for a fit person probably has been changed dramatically. Maybe the current standard is much higher than the old one or the test itself is inaccurate for a good result, hence, leading to a misleading result. There may simply be no foundation for such a comparison, therefore leaving no support for a sound conclusion like that they made. This “uncertain” unfitness issue is the basic premise for the writer to develop his argument, and it could be completely senseless if this assertion is wrong.
Secondly, holding a belief that the unfitness issue is true, the writer avers that computer is not a reason for the low health condition. The only evidence he provides is the computer users are generally healthy in the regions of an overall high-level health condition. But what about the computer users in other areas? Maybe most of the computer ownership settled in the areas of low health condition, and they are much worse in health than others. Additionally, the healthy condition of the computer users in the healthy area may be achieved due to they are rich or other external factors. This evidence cannot dismiss the potential negative effects of computers on health unless some direct and further evidence is provided.
Finally, the writer imputes the unfitness to the recessive economics due to a presumption that the economic recession makes people lack of money for fitness issues. People in Corpora may spend less money on sports and the Corpora may be suffering from a depression of economics, although these two events remain unproved. However, it is hard to tell these two events are logically related. After all, there are many factors leading to a less expenditures on fitness. Maybe the public sport equipment is well-prepared for people and most fitness conditions are free for using, therefore leading to a low spending on them. Even though people do not spend enough time and money on sports, leading to a poor health condition, there could be other reasons, like different preferences, low awareness of sports or so forth, let alone the unknown effects caused by the economics depression.
In retrospect, the writer makes a series assertions out of his assumptions discussed above, and the mere evidence presented is not enough for a sound reasoning. To further strengthen his argument to a sound one, these assumptions must be proved carefully and rigorously with the help of sufficient convincing evidence and a in-depth scrutiny is needed. (42min---577)作者: ppguo 时间: 2011-10-11 09:04
如果怕超时，我觉得还是把提纲先敲出来，再往里面填内容。作者: 冷月钟笛 时间: 2011-10-12 20:47
嗯，有的时候真得琢磨琢磨一些套路~ 提高效率~作者: ppguo 时间: 2011-10-13 01:31
方法对了，事半功倍啊。