AI060，issue处女作，请大家指教

yymomo

60. “Employers should have no right to
obtain information about their employees’ health or other aspects of their
personal lives without the employees’ permission.”

This statement actually consists two
claims: (1) employers should have no right to obtain information about their
employees' health without permission, and (2) they should also have no right to
obtain the employee's other aspects of their personal lives without permission.
I concede that in most cases, employers have no rights to obtain their
employees' personal lives. However, if it is necessary to know the employees'
health status depends on different fields of work.

First of all, whether an employer should
obtain his employees' health condition depends on the industry they are in. A
food related worker should pass severe health exam and keep health, while an
accountant could keep health condition secret. A doctor should keep health
while a machine operator could keep health condition secret. A waiter who
contacts many people a day should keep health for the safety of his customers,
while a artisan who works alone could keep health condition secret.

Second, whether other aspects of employees'
personal lives can be obtained by the employer without permission also depends
on different conditions. As for most people, it is their own rights to keep
their personal lives secret, and the employer has no right to obtain
information about them. But there are also some exceptions. It is hard for a
president of a country, like Bill Clinton, who is a popular person, to conceal
their personal lives. Film stars or famous singers are always the focus of mass
media. If the employer does not know their personal lives earlier than the mass
media, it is possible that some negative news could do harm to the stars, to
the company, and even to the society. So in this case, employers should know
something about employees' personal life.

However, people' rights of privacy are
concerned more and more. In most cases, the employer should respect employees'
rights of privacy, because it is not only a requirement of moral, but also a
requirement of some laws.

On balance, we can safely reach the
conclusion that whether it is necessary for employers to know their employees'
health or other aspects of their personal lives is a complicated depends on
different conditions. When making such decision, an employer should make a
comprehensive analysis between human rights and social benefits.

还有一个关于issue的问题，我按照新东方老师的说法，都是把一些问题depends on
what分开来写，但是这样似乎很难得到一个比较有倾向性的结论。而我看的例文通常作者的观点是有倾向性的，这样会不会让阅卷人有模棱两可的感觉？怎么处理这个问题？



谢谢！

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-5-11 18:17:27编辑过]

judydongxueni

以下是引用yymomo在2005-5-11 18:14:00的发言：

60. “Employers should have no right to
obtain information about their employees’ health or other aspects of their
personal lives without the employees’ permission.”

This statement actually consists two
claims: (1) employers should have no right to obtain information about their
employees' health without permission, and (2) they should also have no right to
obtain the employee's other aspects of their personal lives without permission.
I concede that in most cases, employers have no rights to obtain their
employees' personal lives. However, if it is necessary to know the employees'
health status depends on different fields of work.

whether

First of all, whether an employer should
obtain his employees' health condition depends on the industry they are in. A
food related worker should pass severe health exam and keep health, while an
accountant could keep health condition secret. A doctor should keep health
while a machine operator could keep health condition secret. A waiter who
contacts many people a day should keep health for the safety of his customers,
while a artisan who works alone could keep health condition secret.

healthy

Second, whether other aspects of employees'
personal lives can be obtained by the employer without permission also depends
on different conditions. As for most people, it is their own rights to keep
their personal lives secret, and the employer has no right to obtain
information about them. But there are also some exceptions. It is hard for a
president of a country, like Bill Clinton, who is a popular person, to conceal
their personal lives. Film stars or famous singers are always the focus of mass

his privacy
media. If the employer does not know their personal lives earlier than the mass
media, it is possible that some negative news could do harm to the stars, to
the company, and even to the society. So in this case, employers should know
something about employees' personal life.

However, people' rights of privacy are
concerned more and more. In most cases, the employer should respect employees'
rights of privacy, because it is not only a requirement of moral, but also a
requirement of some laws.

On balance, we can safely reach the
conclusion that whether it is necessary for employers to know their employees'
health or other aspects of their personal lives is a complicated depends on

complication
different conditions. When making such decision, an employer should make a
comprehensive analysis between human rights and social benefits.

还有一个关于issue的问题，我按照新东方老师的说法，都是把一些问题depends on
what分开来写，但是这样似乎很难得到一个比较有倾向性的结论。而我看的例文通常作者的观点是有倾向性的，这样会不会让阅卷人有模棱两可的感觉？怎么处理这个问题？
the most important thing:grammar and spelling is, by-and-large, less important than structure and content. Focus on structure and your argument fomation. In fact, the e-rater's main impact is to put more value on highly structured writing and the use of "key" words and phrases that the e-rater recognizes.

Most GMAT students don't have time to cover everything they would like to cover. Choose the most persuasive relevant points and examples to use. The GMAT graders don't expect you to go in-depth on every topic.The most importan concern here is that you do not go off of the main subject. Stay focused on the topic.
一般来说，issue只是考察一个人对一个topic的分析能力。而不是看你对一个topic有没有恰当的观点，事实上这些题目都没有定论。所以yymomo不用担心没有倾向性。因为只要言之有理中立也同样可以反映你的分析能力。而且这样写的文章一般字数会多一些。

至于你的这篇处女作整体还是挺好的。结构句式都不错，写作的功力可见一斑。但是要注意语法，sc的知识在作文里面一样重要。象是表示是否的时候一定要用whether都不可以忘记哦。

我个人觉得你这篇文章犯了一个straw man的逻辑错误：
Straw man
Here the speaker attributes an argument to an opponent that does not represent the opponent's true position. For instance, a political candidate might charge that his opponent "wants to let all prisioners go free," when in fact his opponent simply favors a highly limited furlough system. The person is portrayed as someone that they are not.

题目让我们分析的是可不可以在不经允许的情况下获取员工的隐私。而不是可不可以获取。这个差的还是挺多的。尽管你可以保持中立或者case by case但是在美国人权如此被重视的一个国家里面如果你说不经过允许在某些情况下也可以恐怕很难得到老师的认同。

当然了只是我个人的感觉欢迎大家继续讨论。

加油啊！
谢谢！

yymomo

谢谢指点！！

我也觉得过分强调那些情况可以获得了，实际上大多数情况下是不可以的。。。