argu 44,求批改

winnalegh · 发表于 2012-11-26 07:19:10

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 for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

提纲：1. 买地不一定开发铜矿，开发铜矿不一定污染环境

2. 开发铜矿不一定危害濒危动物（动物不一定住在该地）

3. 让消费者拒绝购买CCC产品难以执行

The author assumes that CCC will pollute the environment of West Fredonia basing on the fact that CCC has purchased a land in West Fredonia. Further, he/she advises consumers to refuse to purchase CCC's copper productions to prevent CCC’s mining of copper in West Fredonia. However, the author's assumption is not that warranted and the advise is lack of practicality.

Firstly, citing the fact that CCC has bought a land in West Fredonia, he/she implies that the company will mine copper in that land. For a copper miner, this may be true, but we cannot rule out a possibility that the company do not intend to mine copper, instead it may want to construct some parks. Even though the land will be used to mine copper, there is no evidence to show that this exploitation will inevitably pollute the environment. It is possible that the company can produce little pollution which may not harm the land's nature condition.

Additionally, the author cites that some endangered animals live in West Fredonia, so CCC's mining copper will do harm to this animals and lead to serious environment problems. The claim can be warranted when these kinds of animals also lives in the land that belongs to CCC. However, the author do not provide the any data to show the distribution of the animals. If the land does not involve these endangered creatures, the action of mining copper will make little difference to them. So to make clear whether mining copper in this land will harm these animals and further the environment, there should be a survey about the endangered animals’ distribution.

Lastly, the author suggests consumers to refuse copper productions of CCC in order to prevent the company from making a disaster in West Fredonia. However, the suggestion is not practical. It may be relatively easy to ask consumers within a region not to buy CCC's copper productions, but it is quite difficult to persuade all the consumers that may consists of a large number of people from all over the world of CCC to stop consuming its produce. Unless CCC only has a small range of consumers, the resisting of CCC will be hard to implemented.

In a nut shell, the author's claim that CCC will harm the environment of West Fredonia bases on some assumptions ,which may not always warranted. It is better to make a survey to learn about the land's usage and the condition especially the distribution of the endangered animals in West Fredonia. Additionally, the author's advice to prevent the CCC' s mining of copper is impractical.

普渡哥 · 发表于 2012-11-26 11:21:04

but it is quite difficult to persuade all the consumers that may consists of a large number of people from all over the world of CCC to stop consuming its produce

produce 应该是 production?

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-11-27 21:35:11

The author assumesthat CCC will pollute the environment of West Fredonia basing on the fact thatCCC has purchased a land in West Fredonia. Further, he/she advises consumers to refuseto purchase CCC's copper productions to prevent CCC
’s mining of copper in West Fredonia. However, the author's assumption is not thatwarranted and the advice is lack of practicality.

Firstly, citingthe fact that CCC has bought a land in West Fredonia,he/she implies that the company will mine copper in that land. For a copper miner, this may be true, but we cannot rule out a possibility that the company do notintend to mine copper,
这句话是不是多了一重否定instead it may want to construct some parks. Even though the land will be used to mine copper, there is no evidenceto show that this exploitation will inevitably pollute the environment. It is possible that the company can producelittle pollution which may not harm the land's nature condition. examinethe stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument，这最好在中间段落能明显地体现出来，而且可以看出你的段内内容偏少，需要加入一些强调或者支撑性的语句，比如在最后一句后面可以加for the local environment protectiondepartment carry out strict laws and standards on mining，加入这样类似的语句是为了让你的论断推理更加自然而说服力，也显得比较具体。这两点意见适用于下面两段。
因为argu到最后错误以及基本的说理大家都会，所以尽可能在推理自然具体上下功夫。

Additionally, theauthor cites that some endangered animals live in West Fredonia, so CCC's mining copper will do harm to this animals andlead to serious environment problems. The claim can be warranted when these kinds of animals also lives in theland that belongs to CCC. However, the authordoes not provide the any data to show the distribution of the animals. If the land does not involve theseendangered creatures, the action of mining copper will make little differenceto them. So to make clear whethermining copper in this land will harm these animals and further the environment,there should be a survey about the endangered animals
’ distribution.

Lastly, the authorsuggests consumers to refuse copper productions of CCC in order to prevent thecompany from making a disaster in West Fredonia. However, the suggestion is notpractical. It may be relatively easy toask consumers within a region not to buy CCC's copper productions, but it is quite difficult to persuade all theconsumers that may consists of a large number of people from all over the worldof CCC to stop consuming its produce. Unless CCC only has a small range of consumers, the resisting of CCCwill be hard to implement.

In a nut shell,the author's claim that CCC will harm the environment of West Fredonia bases on some assumptions, which may not alwayswarranted. It is better to make a surveyto learn about the land's usage and the condition especially the distributionof the endangered animals in West Fredonia
. Additionally, the author's advice to preventthe CCC’s mining of copper is impractical.

[作文互改] argu 44,求批改

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()