希望有好心人帮忙改改作文

yusteven

大后天就要杀鸡了，希望有好心人帮忙改改作文
选了这两天机经里的两篇，一篇AI 一篇AA
AI：
题库114. Technology ultimately separates and alienates people more than it serves to bring them together.



The speaker asserts that technology eventually makes people separated more than serves to combine them together. To some point, I agree the statement. As the technology develops, we are less dependent on others. However, when think deeper, the technology does improve the way and the extent we contact on each other.

Admittedly, new technology makes our lives more independent. We have micro ovens to make dishes, rather than non-environment-friendly stoves before; we have computers to do complex jobs, rather than couples of people do one job together before; we have PSP or X-box to make us fun, rather than play with friends with ugly toys before. To some extent, we do live lonely now. The convenient lives make us need no assistants any more. In another word, the technology separates and alienates people. As we can see, in the undeveloped regions, people have no modern applicants; they need get together to discuss how to do one work. The people living there have more warranted relationships than the people who live in the developed society.

However, the undeniable truth is people today have more access to communications than ever. Modern people use twitter share their moods with friends on the Internet; they make numerous friends on facebook; they use email or MSN to contact with people far away from them. The fact that the world becomes smaller affects our daily lives and makes the process of working more efficient. Without the modern technology, the world cannot be so touchable, and people cannot know or contract with people as soon as they can; even they need not go outside. Because of the developed technology, people in present day have more contact that before.

In a conclusion, technology makes people separated and alienated to some extend. Nevertheless, it creates new ways for people to have communications with each other. It is hard to say whether technology is harmful in people’s relationships or not. The issue is dependent on what angle we take to see the world.



AA:

The following is taken from an editorial in a local newspaper.
“Over the past decade, the price per pound of citrus fruit has increased substantially. Eleven years ago, Megamart charged 5 cents apiece for lemons, but today it commonly charges over 30 cents apiece. In only one of these last eleven years was the weather unfavorable for growing citrus crops. Evidently, then, citrus growers have been responsible for the excessive increase in the price of citrus fruit, and strict pricing regulations are needed to prevent them from continuing to inflate prices.”



With unwarranted reasoning, the author of the statement achieved a point that strict pricing regulations are needed to prevent the citrus growers from continuing to inflate prices. To support his conclusion, he cited that the price per pond of citrus increases from 5 cents apiece to 30 cents apiece. Subsequently, he attributed citrus growers to the cause of price increase because only one of the last eleven years was the weather unfavourable. It is quite clear that the deduction is fallacious. I will point out why the argument is questionable as follows.

First and fore most, the arguer wrongly consider that the citrus growers is responsible for the excessive increase in the price of citrus fruit. He said that because in only one of these last eleven years was the weather unfavourable for growing citrus crops, the price increase should be charged by citrus growers. In the reasoning, the author made the “either or” mistake. There could be many other factors that affected the high price except weather and growers. If the rent price of the territory for citrus increase far beyond the growers can accept, they have to raise the price. If the number of consumers of citrus grows beyond the amount of citrus, the price of the fruit must be higher than before. So it is unsound to say that citrus growers are responsible for the increase in the price.

The other fallacy the stator made is that he thought 30 cents apiece is too high for consumers. It is ridiculous to make that conclusion. The standard of living in the country where the citrus grow is probably much better than eleven years ago. The income of people there may increase six times or more than before. Compared with the increase of other stuffs, the increase of citrus appears to be small. Thus it is invalid to say that the price increase is unbearable for most people.

To sum up, the author of the argument cannot provably make his conclusion that strict pricing regulations are needed to prevent the citrus growers from continuing to inflate prices. To make his statement more convincing, he needs to get more evidence that can prove 30 cents apiece is a price people cannot accept and the only factors can influence citrus’ price is citrus growers and weather.

馨怡

我现在只复习了AI，所以就说说看了AI的感想
说错了就不管了~~~
我觉得楼主的例子举得太散，一个论点一个具体的例子比较好，比如你的MSN和Email的例子，我觉得你就可以拿你自己和你朋友们当个具体例子，像是：你朋友出国了，你在国内，你们两相聚很远，以前的话只能国际长途很不方便，现在的话只要MSN就可以随时随地联系，甚至还可以可视通话

而且我看了些例文，觉得老外不太喜欢很平均的两分法……你要有自己的观点，到底站在哪一边（这个观点我还在验证中，暂且看看吧）