才开始准备作文，弱弱的问一下

zxkingsey

The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city’s council on the arts.

“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”

Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

这个题可以攻击调查类错误不？？

谢谢

zxkingsey

没有人可以回答一下吗？

我心向明月

“In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art museums has increased by a similar percentage. Since the corporate funding that supports public television, where most of the visual arts programs appear, is now being threatened with severe cuts, we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease. Thus some of the city’s funds for supporting the arts should be reallocated to public television.”

在最近的全市投票中，看virtual arts电视的居民对比五年前投票，增加了15%。在过去的五年中，参考市博物馆的人也大概增加了15%。因运行公共电视台（大多数virtual arts在这个电视台播放）的公司正遭遇严重裁员。我们可以预见，参观市博物馆的人开始减少。因此，一些用来支持艺术的市政基金，应该被重新分配给公共电视台。

我觉得不能攻击调查，可以写的地方很多，比如：

1）原文事实上是假设公众看了电视上的virtual arts，然后去博物馆，导致博物馆参加人数增加。（这假设显然有问题）

2）公共电视台需要的资金非常多，即使将所有的arts fund 全部relocate过去，对电视台也是杯水车薪；

zxkingsey

在最近的全市投票中，看virtual arts电视的居民对比五年前投票，增加了15%。在过去的五年中，参考市博物馆的人也大概增加了15%。因运行公共电视台（大多数virtual arts在这个电视台播放）的公司正遭遇严重裁员。我们可以预见，参观市博物馆的人开始减少。因此，一些用来支持艺术的市政基金，应该被重新分配给公共电视台。

我觉得不能攻击调查，可以选择的攻击点很多，比如：

1）原文事实上是假设公众看了电视上的virtual arts，然后去博物馆，导致博物馆参加人数增加。（这假设显然有问题）

2）公共电视台需要的资金非常多，即使将所有的arts fund 全部relocate过去，对电视台也是杯水车薪；

-- by 会员 我心向明月 (2010/2/5 1:23:24)

黄线处不是这个意思,应该是来自于公司赞助公共电视台面临赞助减少的威胁

为什么不能攻击调查错误?请详细说明一下,在什么情况下才可以了.我觉得可以攻击没有说明调查者啊,如果是电视台自己进行的调查,那么他们为了得到这个funding就有可能扭曲数据啊!

谢谢

我心向明月

谢谢指点，黄色的部分是应该是指公司对公共电视台的资助面临减少。

关于调查，原文已经讲了，citywide poll。您提到原文中没有提到调查者，是的，没有提到，有可能是这个公司做的，也有可能不是这个公司作的。即使是这个公司做的调查，那么还要做进一步假设，因为在此情况下存在两种可能，一种是公司并未操纵调查，另一种是公司操纵了调查。同时，里面提到两次投票。

我的看法是原文的主要问题并不在投票这里。下面是我从OG里面摘录的关于AA的内容：

Analysis of an Argument

You must read a brief argument, analyze the reasoning behind it, and then write a critique of the argument. In this task, you are not asked to state your opinion but rather to analyze the one given. You may, for example, consider what questionable assumptions underlie the author’s thinking, what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion, or what sort of evidence could help strengthen or refute the argument.

Test-Taking Strategies - Analysis of an Argument

1. Focus on the task of analyzing and critiquing a line of thinking or reasoning.

Get used to asking yourself questions such as the following: What questionable assumptions might underlie the thinking? What alternative explanations might be given? What counterexamples might be raised? What additional evidence might prove useful in fully and fairly evaluating the reasoning?

2. Develop fully any examples you use.

Do not simply list your examples—explain how they illustrate your point.

3. Discuss alternative explanations or counterexamples.

These techniques allow you to introduce illustrations and examples drawn from your observations, experiences, and reading.

4. Make sure your response reads like a narrative.

Your response should not read like an outline. It should use full sentences, a coherent organizational scheme,

zxkingsey

谢谢指点，黄色的部分是应该是指公司对公共电视台的资助面临减少。

关于调查，原文已经讲了，citywide poll。您提到原文中没有提到调查者，是的，没有提到，有可能是这个公司做的，也有可能不是这个公司作的。即使是这个公司做的调查，那么还要做进一步假设，因为在此情况下存在两种可能，一种是公司并未操纵调查，另一种是公司操纵了调查。同时，里面提到两次投票。

我的看法是原文的主要问题并不在投票这里。下面是我从OG里面摘录的关于AA的内容：

Analysis of an Argument

You must read a brief argument, analyze the reasoning behind it, and then write a critique of the argument. In this task, you are not asked to state your opinion but rather to analyze the one given. You may, for example, consider what questionable assumptions underlie the author’s thinking, what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion, or what sort of evidence could help strengthen or refute the argument.

Test-Taking Strategies - Analysis of an Argument

1. Focus on the task of analyzing and critiquing a line of thinking or reasoning.

Get used to asking yourself questions such as the following: What questionable assumptions might underlie the thinking? What alternative explanations might be given? What counterexamples might be raised? What additional evidence might prove useful in fully and fairly evaluating the reasoning?

2. Develop fully any examples you use.

Do not simply list your examples—explain how they illustrate your point.

3. Discuss alternative explanations or counterexamples.

These techniques allow you to introduce illustrations and examples drawn from your observations, experiences, and reading.

4. Make sure your response reads like a narrative.

Your response should not read like an outline. It should use full sentences, a coherent organizational scheme,

-- by 会员 我心向明月 (2010/2/5 5:10:49)

赞成两个poll的说法,在argument里提到了两个poll,一个是五年前的,一个是现在的,不好攻击.

还有,我想问的是你引用的这个内容是想说明什么? 是因为在这里面OG没有提到survey的问题????

还有,问题有点多,不好意思啦,除了你上面攻击的那两点还可以攻击什么呢?

万分谢谢~~~~

我心向明月

引用OG那段是这样的：我想了半天，觉得投票是可以写了，但是写起来比较麻烦。但是，又感觉“麻烦”不是好理由，于是就跑去OG上搜刮下来几段，想找点依据（可OG上也没有具体讲什么可以什么不可以写）。

还有这段可以写：

we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease.

可能很多人是参观了museum后，然后再到TV看virtual arts。

zxkingsey

因果关系颠倒~

zxkingsey

引用OG那段是这样的：我想了半天，觉得投票是可以写了，但是写起来比较麻烦。但是，又感觉“麻烦”不是好理由，于是就跑去OG上搜刮下来几段，想找点依据（可OG上也没有具体讲什么可以什么不可以写）。

还有这段可以写：

we can expect that attendance at our city’s art museums will also start to decrease.

可能很多人是参观了museum后，然后再到TV看virtual arts。

-- by 会员 我心向明月 (2010/2/7 5:12:11)

因果关系颠倒

可以可以~~