应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜    

小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 出国留学区 » 出国考试 » A Collection of GRE Sample Essays
202/2返回列表上一页12
查看: 1321  |  回复: 19
只看楼主 @他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看
当前主题已经存档。

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

"Too much emphasis is placed on the development of reading skills in elementary school. Many students who are discouraged by the lonely activity of reading turn away from schoolwork merely because they are poor readers. But books recorded on audiocassette tape provide an important alternative for students at this crucial stage in their education, one the school board should not reject merely because of the expense involved. After all, many studies attest to the value of allowing students to hear books read aloud; there is even evidence that students whose parents read to them are even more likely to become able readers. Thus, hearing books on tape can only make students more eager to read and to learn. Therefore, the school board should encourage schools to buy books on tape and to use them in elementary education."

In this argument, the writer claims that elementary schools place too much emphasis on the development of reading skills; therefore books on audiocassette should be provided as an alternative method of learning. The arguer attempts to substantiate the conclusion by citing studies that show the value of allowing students to hear books read aloud; including evidence that students whose parents read to them are even more likely to become better readers. This argument ultimately fails as it suffers from several critical fallacies.

First of all, the writer flatly states, without any supporting evidence whatsoever, that many students are discouraged by the "lonely" activity of reading, then continues on in the same sentence to state that students turn away from schoolwork solely because they are poor readers. Students often read to themselves or to the other students in a classroom situation - hardly a lonely activity. Additionally, this argument puts the effect before the cause - inviting the circular logic that students stop trying to learn to read because they are poor readers. Following this argument to its logical conclusion, because they are poor readers, they should not try to learn how to improve their reading. This absurd argument is analogous to saying that a new student should never start to learn in the first place, because he or she knows nothing.

Secondly, the writer cites as evidence in favor of the use of audiocassettes the idea that students whose parents read to them are even more likely to become proficient readers. It is at best doubtful that this provides proof that listening to someone read a book stimulates a young mind to learn to read better. It is far more likely that the child gains an interest in learning to read from the parents themselves, not the physical act of having something read to them. In this situation, the parent is showing the child his or her ability to read, which the child will naturally want to emulate. Furthermore, it is likely that a parent that spends time reading to a child is likely to be a much more encouraging parent, particularly when it comes to that child's education.

Thirdly, the writer fails to convince in his argument that hearing books on audiocassette makes a child more eager to read and to learn. The author cites many studies that show value in allowing students to hear books read aloud - he or she does not state that the studies show whether that value manifests itself as better reading skills or simply better listening skills, which seems more likely than any improvement in reading ability.

Finally, the author fails to take into consideration that merely listening to books on audiocassette fails to provide the visual stimulation necessary to develop higher level reading skills. It is more likely that hearing a book on audiocassette would discourage that student from ever reading that particular book on his or her own. Elementary schools are the main developing grounds for a student's reading abilities- there is no substitute for actively learning to actually see the writing and comprehend what it is trying to say. Listening skills can be developed through means other than by hearing books on audiocassette. Reading skills are an absolutely irreplaceable and fundamental part of an elementary student's education.

In conclusion, the writer's argument fails to address several weak areas that lead to a rejection of the overall conclusion that the school board should encourage schools to buy books on tape for use in elementary education. To strengthen the argument, direct cause and effect evidence should be set forth that shows better overall learning without any loss in the development of higher level reading skills for students.

(612 words)

　


参考译文


[题目]

下述文字摘自一封致某地方报纸编辑的信函：

"在小学里，人们对阅读技能的培养强调得过分了。许多对孤独的阅读活动望而却步的学生无心专注于学业，仅仅是因为他们阅读能力薄弱。但是，录制在盒式录音磁带上的书本内容却可以向学生在其教育中如此关键的这一阶段提供另外一个重要的选择方案。对于这一方案，校董事会不能纯粹因为所涉及到的费用而予以摈弃。不管怎么说，许多研究均可验证让学生聆听大声朗诵书本内容这一做法的价值。甚至还不乏这样的证据，即有些学生，由于其父母将书本内容朗读给他们听，就更有可能成为阅读能力很强的人。因此，在盒式录音磁带上听书本内容只会使学生更迫切地去阅读和学习。故校董事会应该鼓励学校去购置磁带书本，并将其应用于小学教学之中。"


[范文正文]

在本段论述中，作者宣称小学过分强调对学生阅读能力的培养；因此，录制在盒式录音磁带上的书本内容应提供给学生，作为又一种可选择的学习方法。论述者通过援引某些研究，力图来证明自己的结论，所援引的研究表明，让学生聆听书本内容被大声朗读这一做法不无价值。论述者还提供了这样的证据，即有些学生，由于其父母亲将书本内容朗读给他们听，就较有可能成为阅读能力很强的人。该论点由于存在着某些严重的逻辑谬误而最终无法站得住脚。 首先，作者言之凿凿地、且在毫无任何佐证性证据的情况下陈述道，许多学生对"孤独的"阅读行为望而却步，接着在同一个句子中继续陈述道，学生会仅仅因为阅读能力差而无心投入到学业之中。学生常常会在课堂氛围中自己默读或者朗读给其他学生听，这就很难将阅读说成是一种"孤独的"活动。此外，该论点将因果倒置--诉诸于循环论证式逻辑推理 --学生们因为阅读技能差而不愿努力去学习阅读。按此论据得出的逻辑结论便是：因为他们阅读能力差，他们就不必作任何努力去学习如何来提高其阅读能力。这一荒谬的论述仿佛就像是在说，一个新生永远没有必要开始学习任何东西，因为这位新生一无所知。

其次，作者援引了某一理念作为证据，用来为盒式录音磁带的使用进行辩护，这一理念便是，当一个学生有父母对他进行朗读时，他便更有可能成为一个精于阅读的人。如果将这视为证据，说明听他人朗读一本书便能刺激一颗年幼的心灵去学习如何具有更强的阅读能力，这充其量也是十分令人怀疑的。更有可能的是，孩子从父母身上所获得的是一种去学习阅读的兴趣，而非由他人对他们进行朗读这一具体行为本身。在此情形中，父母所做的是向孩子表明他或她的阅读能力，孩子自然愿意模仿这一能力。再者，一位花时间来给孩子进行朗读的父亲或母亲更有可能是一个教子有方的人，尤其是在涉及到孩子教育这一方面。

第三，作者在其论述中没能让我们相信在盒式录音磁带上听书能使孩子更加渴望去阅读和学习。作者援引了多项研究，以期证明让学生听人大声朗读书本这一做法的价值。但这位作者并没能说清楚，这些研究所表明的价值是否呈现为更强的阅读技能，或者只是呈现为更强的听力技能，而这一技能似乎比任何阅读能力方面的提高来得更有可能。

最后需要指出的是，作者没有考虑到这样一个因素，即纯粹在盒式录音带上听书是无法提供培养较高层次阅读技能所必需的视觉刺激的。情况更有可能是，在盒式录音带上听某一本书会打消该学生自己去阅读那本特定的书的积极性。小学教育是发展孩子阅读能力的主要阶段，没有任何东西可以来替代积极的学习行为，亲眼去看所写的内容并去理解字里行间所要表达的内容。要发展听力技能，并不必定需要借助在盒式录音带上听书这一手段。阅读技能是小学生教育中绝对无可替代的和最基本的部分。

归纳而言，作者的论述没有能解决某些薄弱之处，正是这些没能纠正的薄弱之处，使学校董事会应该鼓励学校去购买磁带书本用于小学教育这一总体结论无法得以成立。若要使其论据更具充分说服力，必须摆出直接的因果证据来证明，学生在发展较高层次的阅读技能方面在没有蒙受任何损失的情况下，总体学习效果得到了提高。　
赞一下 回复此楼
11楼2006-04-06 16:06:12
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
Issue

"When we concern ourselves with the study of history, we become storytellers. Because we can never know the past directly but must construct it by interpreting evidence, exploring history is more of a creative enterprise than it is an objective pursuit. All historians are storytellers."


Sample Essay

There would seem to be two different perspectives presented in the above statement. The first two sentences are concerned with exploring history and would seem to discuss looking at history that has already been written. People who concern themselves with the study of history are not storytellers, but rather story interpreters. The last sentence refers to the people that write about history, the historians themselves. Certainly, to a certain extent, historians must be storytellers because they have a story to tell. But the term "storyteller" seems to imply a greater amount of creativity than what is involved in actually explaining what has happened in history. For the purposes of this essay, I will focus on the perspective of the historian, as it would appear to be the underlying core idea.

From the perspective of the historian, most historians do not have the benefit of having lived through the period of history that they are writing about. By researching through thousands of old letters, legal documents, family heirlooms and the like, historians must look at fragments of history and somehow put these pieces together to reconstruct what actually happened. In this sense, they must be storytellers because inevitably, their personal insights become part of what others will see when they read the historian's writings. As an example, there are many differing opinions as to whether Thomas Jefferson actually fathered children with one of his slaves. Some historians have written that it is a virtual certainty, while others argue that it was his brother, rather than Thomas himself, that fathered the children. They both cannot be right. Although they are all historians, they are also storytellers giving their opinion on what version of events actually transpired.

Historians that are documenting events as they happen today have much less of an opportunity to fall into the "storyteller" category as they are present as witnesses to these events as they are happening. Television, newspaper and other media coverage is widespread and almost unrelenting. Television captures visuals and audios that are spread rapidly around the world and theoretically can last forever. There is much less room for putting one's own "spin" on an event, especially regarding the exact details of what happened. But even with today's events, there is room for opinion on the part of the historian. For example, historians are already arguing what evidence the United States government had regarding potential terrorism prior to the incredible tragedy of September 11, 2001. Looking back now, it seems obvious that the government should have known that something on a large scale was going to happen. With the benefit of hindsight, there were several failures in the government's counter-terrorism efforts. Historians will now argue over the exact version of what happened, as they become storytellers to try to explain 9/11 to future generations.

Another example showcasing the idea that all historians are storytellers is that of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Variations on who was responsible and what actually happened have been the focus of hundreds, if not thousands, of books and historical accounts. Many historians argue vehemently that his or her account of history is the "true" version. Given the same evidence, historians decide which evidence is credible and which is not to arrive at their own conclusions. Clearly storytelling is a big part of how history is written.

Particularly when it concerns ancient history, all historians must be storytellers to a certain degree. "Connecting the dots" of surviving evidence from the time period or event being examined requires a certain amount of personal intuition and supposition. Historians that write about events from the more recent periods will probably be less inclined to be "storytellers" as the sheer mass of evidence that is presented will likely lead to better documentation of historic events as they happen.

(684 words)


观点陈述型作文/[题目]

"当我们关注历史研究时，我们便成为故事讲述者。由于我们永远也不可能直接知道过去。而只能通过对证据的解释来构建历史，因此，探究历史更多地成为一项创造性的事业，而不是一种客观的求索。所有历史学家都是故事讲述者。"


[范文正文]

上述陈述中似乎存在两个不同的视角。开头两个句子所涉及到的是探究历史，所探讨的似乎是审视业已被著述的那种历史。专注于历史研究的人不是故事讲述者，而是故事解释者。毫无疑问，在某种程度上，史学家必须是故事讲述者，因为他们有故事要讲。但"故事讲述者"这一术语似乎暗示着一种更大程度上的创造性，要超过实际解释历史上所发生过的一切这一过程中所涉及的程度。为了本文的目的，我将集中在史学家这一视角，因为这似乎是论题中所包含的核心主题。

从史学家这一视角看，大多数史学家均无幸亲身经历他们所著述的那段历史。通过研究数以千计的古老书信，法律文件，家族的传世之宝等物件，史学家必须分析一个个残缺不全的历史片断，以某种方式将这些碎片拼凑起来，重新构建实际所发生的一切。从这层意义上讲，他们不得不成为故事讲述者，因为他们的个人见解不可避免地成为其他人研读史学家著作时所见到的一部分。例如，围绕着托马斯·杰佛逊实际上是否与他的一个女奴生有几个孩子、这一问题，史学们众说纷纭。有些史学家著述道，这几乎是一个铁定的事实。但其他一些史学家则反驳说，是他的兄弟，而不是杰佛逊本人，才是这些孩子的父亲。双方不可能都对。他们都是史学家，他们也是一些故事讲述者，给出他们自己的观点，以期说明究竟哪个版本才是实际发生的事件。

记载当今正在发生的事件的史学家们，不太可能被归入"故事讲述者"这一范畴，因为他们作为历史见证者亲身经历了各种事件的发生。电视、报纸和其他媒体的报道铺天盖地，几乎从不间断。电视所捕捉到的视频和音频信息会被迅速地传遍全球，并在理论上可永久地存在。对某一事件作出个人"诠释"的余地越来越小，尤其是有关所发生事件的确切细节。但即使是对于当今发生的事件，史学家仍有表达个人观点的空间。例如，史学家早就在争论美国政府在无法令人置信的2001年9月11日悲剧发生之前关于潜在的恐怖主义活动已拥有了哪些证据。现在回顾起来，情况似乎十分明朗，即政府早就知道某种大规模事件将要发生。得益于后见之明，我们现在可以看清楚，政府的反恐努力中存在着诸多漏洞。史学家从现在起将会针对事件发生的确切版本争论不休，因为他们在试图向后代解释"9.11事件"时都将成为"故事讲述者"。

例证"所有史学家都是故事讲述者"这一观点的另一个实例是约翰·弗·肯尼迪的谋杀事件。谁对这起事件负责？实际上发生了什么？有关这类问题的各种说法构成了成千上万部史学著作的焦点。许多史学家都言之凿凿地宣称，他（她）对那段历史的叙述才是"确凿无疑"的版本。即使在被给予相同证据的情况下，史学家也会去判断哪些证据是可信的，哪些不足为信，并最终得出自己的结论。显而易见，讲述故事在历史著述中占有相当大的一部分。

尤其是在涉及到古代历史时，所有史学家在一定程度上都是故事讲述者。从被审视的历史时期或事件残存的证据中将"蛛丝马迹"串连起来，这需要一定程度上的个人直觉和假设。对较为近期的历史事件进行著述的史学家可能不太愿意成为"故事讲述者"，因为所能获得的大量证据可能导致对所发生的事件的过程更为详尽的记载。
赞一下 回复此楼
12楼2006-04-06 16:06:32
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
Topic

The Trash-Site Safety Council has recently conducted a statewide study of possible harmful effects of garbage sites on the health of people living near the sites. A total of five sites and 300 people were examined. The study revealed, on average, only a small statistical correlation between the proximity of homes to garbage sites and the incidence of unexplained rashes among people living in these homes. Furthermore, although it is true that people living near the largest trash sites had a slightly higher incidence of the rashes, there was otherwise no correlation between the size of the garbage sites and people's health. Therefore, the council is pleased to announce that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard. We see no need to restrict the size of such sites in our state or to place any restrictions on the number of homes built near the sites.


Sample Essay

In this argument, the council comes to the conclusion that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant health hazard and that therefore, there is no need to restrict the size of the garbage sites or the number of homes built near the site. To support this conclusion, the council cites a study of five garbage sites and three hundred people that showed only a small correlation between the closeness of the homes to the sites and the incidence of unexplained rashes among those people living there. Additionally, the council came to this conclusion despite the fact that people living near the largest such site had a slightly higher incidence of the rashes. This argument suffers from several critical weaknesses in logic and information presented.

First of all, the members of the "Trash-Site Safety Council" are not listed, which could make a big difference in the believability of the study. A truly independent council could produce results that could be considered much more reliable than one with members with possible conflicts of interest. However, if the council were made up mainly of people who have an interest in finding that there is no problem with the trash sites - homebuilders or city councilmen, for example - then the study would lack some credibility. Without knowing the backgrounds and priorities of the council members, the argument is greatly weakened.

Secondly, this was cited as a statewide study, but only five sites and three hundred people were studied. Although on average there was only a small statistical correlation shown between the nearness of the trash sites and the homes and people who lived in them, the margin of error could be quite large due to studying only a small sample of people that live near the trash sites in the state. It would be much more persuasive were a large majority of the homes and people near trash sites studied rather than merely a small percentage.

Furthermore, the study cites only unexplained rashes as a health-related problem with some statistical correlation. The presence or absence of other types of health problems is not mentioned in the study. It could be that there were other, perhaps not immediately noticeable health problems such as cancer affecting the people living near the sites. Additionally, the study appears to cover only one moment in time, or at least the duration of the study is not discussed. Perhaps there are long-term effects that cannot be discovered by a study conducted over a short period of time. This weakens the argument by leaving out information that could help to persuade the reader one way or another.

To add to the lack of credibility, the study does not discuss the relative size of the garbage sites or how close the homes and people were to the sites. There is really no data present to allow a proper decision to be made restricting the size of the sites or how close the homes could be located near the trash sites. At the very least, the fact that there is a slightly higher incidence of rashes in those living nearest the biggest trash sites indicates a need for further studies to prove or disprove the idea that trash sites of a certain size or location are health hazards.

In summary, the findings and conclusions of the Trash-Site Safety Council are based mainly on speculation and a small amount of indicative data. The disclosure of the council members motives, the study of a larger sample of the population and trash sites, and further information on other types of health problems and relative nearness of the homes and people to the trash sites would give a much better argument either for or against restrictions on the such sites.

(640 words)

　


参考译文


［题目］

垃圾场安全委员会最近在全州范围内进行了一项调查，旨在研究垃圾场对居住在附近的居民的身体有可能产生的有害影响。被调查的有五座垃圾场以及300多位居民。研究表明，平均而言，居所紧挨着垃圾场这一事实与这些居所中所居住人口发生的无法解释的疹子之间，仅存在着一种微弱的数据关系。此外，虽然居住在最大的垃圾场附近的居民发疹的程度略高这一事实属实，但在其他方面，垃圾场的大小与人们的健康之间毫无关系。因此，委员会可以甚为欣慰地宣布，目前这套垃圾场体制并不会对健康构成一项重大危险。我们认为毫无必要去限制本州内这类垃圾场的规模，也没有必要去限制垃圾堆附近所建造的房屋数量。


[范文正文]

在本段论述中，委员会得出结论，认为目前的垃圾场体制并没有对健康构成一种重大危险，因此，毫无必要去限制垃圾场的规模或垃圾场周围的住房数量。为了支持这一结论，委员会援引了针对五所垃圾场和300位居民所作的一项研究，据此证明在住房紧挨着垃圾场与居住在那里的人中间所发生的难以名状的疹子之间仅存微弱的关联。此外，委员会在得出这一结论时，全然无视这样一个事实，即居住在这类最大的垃圾场附件的人发病的机率略高。论述在逻辑思路和呈示的信息方面不乏某些关键性的弱点。

其一，"垃圾场安全委员会"的成员没有被清楚列举出来，这一点可令该研究的可信度产生巨大的差异。一个完全独立的委员会所提出的结论，会被视为比一个成员间可能存在着利害关系冲突的委员会所得出的结论可信度高。但是，如果组成该委员会的成员所感兴趣的仅仅是去揭示出垃圾场不存在问题--例如象房地产开发商或市政厅议员，那么，该项研究会失去某些可信度。如果对委员会成员的背景以及他们所优先考虑的问题一无所知，则本段论述倍遭削弱。

其二，所作的研究据称是涵盖整个州的，但被调查的仅有五座垃圾场和300位居民。尽管平均而论，垃圾场的近距离与住所以及与居住在这些房屋内的人之间存在一丝微弱的联系，但由于所研究的仅是该州内居住在垃圾场附近的很小一批人口样本，故误差程度可能会相当的严重。如果在所有垃圾场附近的人和住所当中，有大部分的居民和住所得以被研究，而不只是一个很小的百分比的话，那么，所作的调查将更具说服力。

此外，该研究仅援引难以名状的疹子作为与健康相关的、带有一定统计学关系的问题。该研究没有提及其他类别的健康问题存在与否。情况有可能是，还存在着其他类型的、或许不是那么昭然若揭的健康问题，例如癌症，正影响着居住在这些垃圾场附近的人们。再有，该研究所涵盖的似乎只是一小段时间，或者至少该研究的时间跨度不曾得到讨论。也许，有些长远影响决非是一份只在短期内进行的研究所能涵盖得了的。这一点再度削弱了本段论述，因为可以使读者信服的信息被疏忽了。 使可信度进一步受损的是，该研究没有讨论各垃圾场的相对规模，也没讨论住房和居民离垃圾场到底有多近。实际上，一点都没有数据来允许人们作出一种恰当的判断，是否应该去限制垃圾场的规模，也没讨论住房与垃圾场之间相隔多远才算安全距离。至少，在那些居住在最靠近最大的垃圾场的人身上疹子的发生率略高这一事实表明，有必要进行更深入的研究，以证明或驳倒某种规模或某种位置的垃圾场会对健康构成危害这一想法。 概括而论，垃圾场安全委员会的研究发现和研究结论所主要依据的是揣测和数量有限的说明数据。如能揭示出委员会成员的动机，研究为数更多的人口和垃圾场样本，就其他类别的健康问题以及住房和居民应与垃圾场之间保持怎样的相对距离提供更进一步的信息的话，那么，作者便能作出更为充分的论述，无论是赞成还是反对对垃圾场实施限制。
赞一下 回复此楼
13楼2006-04-06 16:06:59
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
Issue

"Some educational systems emphasize the development of student's capacity for reasoning and logical thinking, but students would benefit more from an education that also taught them to explore their own emotions."

Sample Essay

The ability of a student to think clearly using reasoning and logical thinking is of paramount importance in order to ensure his or her success as an individual after graduation from a university. To be able to look at a situation and use logic and reason to analyze the facts and develop an opinion or solution is to have a solid foundation for success in all aspects of life. Exploring one's emotions is important, but it is outside of the realm of what can be learned in a university classroom. Emotional self-exploration is best done outside of a classroom situation, although there may be some opportunity for students in the classroom to learn a methodology for doing so.

The ability to survive and thrive in a society is based on the assumption that human beings act according to reason and logic. From a very early age, most people are taught that certain actions will bring about certain reactions, and that by using logic you can figure out what the response will be in most situations. Reasoning is also developed early on, although sometimes it is difficult to explain reasoning to a two-year old. Humans are probably born with a desire for reason and logic, as demonstrated by almost any child's incessant asking of the question "Why?". To understand the underlying reasons why something happens is a fundamental part of human nature, proven by the exploits of explorers, scientists and mathematicians over the course of human history.

As a result, the basic framework of most forms of human society requires that a person must act according to the demands of reason and logic. Rules of law are based on the concept that individuals respond to rules based on reasoning and logic. The ability to think according to logic and reason is so imperative that it is essential that it be taught to university students at even the highest levels. What if law schools and medical schools decided that it was more important to allow students to explore their own emotions at the expense of learning the latest laws or medical techniques? Perhaps one course could be taught to help students to deal with the emotional demands of being a lawyer or a doctor, but to train students to explore their own emotions at the expense of learning about logical and reasonable thinking would be to invite catastrophe in society.

One of the main problems with emphasizing to students the importance of exploring one's own emotions is that it creates a "me first" attitude towards their studies. Certainly a degree of self-introspection is necessary to deal with society, but to put emphasis on this above all else is to inculcate in the student the idea that he or she is more important than others, and that what he or she thinks matters a great deal more than it probably does in reality. Too much emotional self-exploration could create individuals who see their emotions as more important than what they contribute to society, which would damage that society as a whole.

A certain amount of self-introspection into one's emotions is probably helpful to the development of a student as an overall person. Usually this kind of activity is explored fully in basic psychology classes that most students are required to take at university. Basic courses in sociology and psychology as well as other humanities courses give students plenty of opportunity to explore their own emotions. Rather than teaching students how to explore their own emotions, it would seem to be a better idea to teach students how to deal with these emotions. Only by instructing students in reasoning and logic can they learn how to apply whatever inner emotions they may have to becoming a successful member of a society.

(627 words)

观点陈述型作文/[题目]

"有些教育强调发展学生的逻辑和思维能力，但一种也能教学生去探索其自我情感的教育，可使学生们获益更多。"

[范文正文]

一个学生运用逻辑推理和思维进行清晰的思索，这一能力对于这位学生大学以后的个人成功具有至高无上的重要性。能够审视某一特定情形，应用逻辑和理性，对事实展开分析，并形成观点或解决方法，这对于在生活中的任何方面获得成功，都能奠定一个坚实的基础。探索个人的情感无疑是重要的，但它外在于大学课堂的教学范围。个人情感探索最好是在课堂情景之外的地方来完成，虽然学生在课堂内可能有机会学到这样做的某种方法。

在社会中得以生存和飞黄腾达，这一能力基于这样一个前提，即人类须按照理性和逻辑来行动。从孩提时代起，大多数人就被告知，自己的某些行为会造成他人的某些反应，通过应用逻辑分析，你就能推断在大多数情形中他人的反应会是什么样的。推理的能力在小时候也得以培养起来，尽管有时候向一个2岁的小孩解释推理甚为困难。人类对于理性和逻辑的欲望可能生而有之，举例来说，几乎任何一个孩子都会"为什么……？"地问个没完。要弄懂事情发生的基本原因是人性的一个基本部分，这一点可从人类历史进程中探险家、科学家和数学家们的功绩中得以证明。

由此看来，大多数形式的人类社会的基本架构要求人们按照理性和逻辑的要求行事。法律的规则基于这样一个概念，即个人须遵循基于逻辑和理性思维的规则。必须按逻辑和理性来思索，这一能力是如此至关重要，以至于即使处在最高层次上的大学生，也必须被授以这一能力。试想一下，如果法学院或医学院认为，让学生去探索其情感，而放弃学习最新的法律和医疗技术，其结果将会怎样？或许，可以开设一门课来帮助学生处理当律师或大夫的情感要求。但是，以学习逻辑和推理思维为代价，训练学生去探索其情感，这意味着在社会中招致灾难。

向学生强调探索其情感重要性，这一做法的诸多主要问题之一是，它会造成学生对其学习产生一种"唯　我独尊"的心态。当然，一定程度上的自我反省对于和社会打交道是必要的，但将它凌驾于其他一切之上将会在学生的内心灌输这样一种理念，即他（她）要比他人更为重要，他（她）的想法极为重要，而实际上或许并非如此。过多的自我情感探索所造就的将是这样一些个人，他们会将其情感视为比他们对社会的贡献更为重要，而这于整个社会都是有害的。

一定程度上的对个人情感的自我反省或许有助于学生整体人格的发展。一般而言，这种活动大多数学生在大学期间必须选择的心理学基础课程中可得到充分探索。社会学和心理学的基础，以及其他人文学科的课程，赋予学生大量的机会去探索其个人情感。相对于去教授学生如何去探索其个人情感，教授学生如何去处理这些情感或许更为有益。只有通过教育学生提高其逻辑推理和分析能力，才能使学生学会去应用他们所拥有的任何内心情感，去成为社会的成功一员。
赞一下 回复此楼
14楼2006-04-06 16:07:28
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
As people grow older, an enzyme known as PEP increasingly breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in learning and memory. But now, researchers have found compounds that prevent PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart. In tests, these compounds almost completely restored lost memory in rats. The use of these compounds should be extended to students who have poor memory and difficulty in concentrating-and therefore serious problems in school performance. Science finally has a solution for problems neither parents nor teachers could solve.

In this argument, the arguer states that researchers have found compounds that keep an enzyme known as PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart, which are known to be involved in learning and memory. The arguer states that tests have shown that these compounds almost completely restored lost memory in rats, and that therefore, these compounds should be administered to students with poor memory and difficulty in concentrating. This argument is unconvincing because it contains several critical flaws in logic.

First of all, the arguer states that as people grow older, PEP breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals that are involved in learning and memory. It is true that generally, as people get older, they tend to have more problems with learning and memory. However, there is no direct link mentioned between the breaking down of the neuropeptide chemicals and the loss of learning ability or memory. Additionally, the arguer mentions neuropeptide chemicals that are broken down by PEP. What the researchers have found is a compound that prevents neuropeptides from breaking apart. These are two different physical actions: the breaking down of neuropeptide chemicals as opposed to the breaking apart of the neuropeptides themselves. Furthermore, it is not stated which of these physical actions is involved with the loss of learning ability and memory. It is not explicitly stated that the breaking down of chemicals causes a loss in learning ability and memory, only that this happens as people grow older. It is also not expressly stated whether the breaking apart of the neuropeptides themselves causes memory loss or a lessened learning ability. Without showing a direct link between the effect of keeping the neuropeptides from breaking apart and a reduction in the loss of memory and learning ability, the efficacy of the compounds is called into question.

Secondly and most obviously, the compounds were only tested on rats. Rats may have a similar genetic structure to humans, but they are most certainly not the same as humans. There may be different causes for the learning and memory problems in rats as opposed to that of humans. The effect of the compounds on rats may also be very different from their effect on human beings. It is absurd in the extreme to advocate giving these compounds to students, even assuming that they would help the students with their studies, without conducting further studies assessing the compounds' overall effects on humans. The argument fails on this particular fact if for no other reason.

Additionally, the arguer begins his or her argument by stating that "as people grow older", PEP breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in learning and memory. At the end of the argument, the arguer advocates extending the compounds that prevent PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart to students who have poor memory and difficulty in concentrating. Students are generally young, not older people. There is no evidence presented that shows what actually causes students to have a poor memory or difficulty in concentrating. Indeed, it is more likely that it is extracurricular activities or a lack of sleep that causes such problems in students, not a problem associated with aging. It is highly unlikely that even if the stated compounds could help prevent the memory loss and decreased learning ability associated with aging that it would have any benefits for students.

In summary, the arguer fails to convince with the argument as presented. To strengthen the argument, the arguer must show a direct link between the breaking apart of neuropeptides and loss of memory and learning ability. Additionally, he or she must show that students' poor memory and difficulty in concentrating is a result of the same process, and that the researcher's compounds would have as beneficial an effect on humans as it seems to have on rats.

(633 words)

　


参考译文


［题目］

随着人们日渐衰老，一种被称为PEP的酶会不断地分解学习与记忆过程中所涉及到的神经肽化学物。但现在，研究人员已发现了可阻止PEP致使神经肽分裂的化合物。在测试中，这些化合物几乎在老鼠身上能完全恢复缺失的记忆。这些化合物的运用应该也推广到记忆力衰弱或专注力有困难的学生身上，不然将会造成学业表现上的严重问题。科学终于解决了那些令家长和老师束手无策的问题。


[范文正文]

在本段论述中，论述者指出，研究人员已发现了某些化合物，可以阻止一种被称为PEP的酶的物质将神经肽予以分解，而神经肽则是学习和记忆过程中所需涉及到的物质。论述者还宣称，检测结果表明，这些化合物几乎完全恢复了老鼠身上缺失的记忆。因此这些化合物应该让那些记忆力差和难于集中注意力的学生服用。这段论述缺乏说服力，因为它包含着某些逻辑推理方面甚为严重的缺陷。

首先，论述者称，随着人们渐趋衰老，PEP 会分解学习和记忆过程中所涉及的神经肽化学物。确实，随人们渐趋衰老，他们往往会在学习和记忆方面遭遇诸多问题。但是，在神经肽化学物的分解以及学习能力与记忆力丧失之间，却没有提到任何直接的联系。除此之外，论述者提及被PEP所分解的几种神经肽化学物。但研究人员所发现的只是一种可阻止神经肽不致于分裂的化合物。这是两种不同性质的物理作用：神经肽化学物的分解有别于神经肽自身的分裂。此外，原论述并未陈述这两种物理作用中的那一种与学习能力和记忆能力的丧失相涉。论述者没有明确陈述化学物的分解导致了学习能力和记忆能力的丧失，而只是陈述这种情形只是随着人们日趋年迈而发生。原论述中也没有确切地陈述神经肽自身的分裂是否会导致记忆缺失或学习能力下降。如果无法在阻止神经肽分裂所能产生的作用与减少记忆能力和学习能力丧失之间证明某种直接的联系，那么，化合物的效用将令人质疑。 第二，也是极为明显地，化合物只是在老鼠身上进行了测试。虽然老鼠与人类具有类似的基因结构，但它们无论如何并不等同于人类。对于学习和记忆问题，老鼠所遇到的原因很可能全然不同于人类所遇到的原因。在没有作进一步的研究来估评化合物对人类所产生的总体效果的情况下，就去提倡将这些化合物供学生服用，甚至假设它们有助于学生提高其学习效果，这实乃荒唐至极。即使不是出于其他原因的话，就这一特定事实本身，该段论述根本就站不住脚。 进一步而言，论述者在其论述的开始陈述道，"随着人们渐趋衰老"，PEP会将学习和记忆过程中所涉及的神经肽化学物进行分解。在论述的结尾之处，论述者倡导将那些可阻止PEP致使神经肽分裂的化合物推广至那些记忆力和专注力差的学生身上。学生普遍而言都是年轻人，而不是老年人。论述者没有拿出任何证据来证明究竟是什么原因实际导至学生们记忆力和专注力下降。较有可能的是，是那些课外活动，或缺少充足的睡眠，导致了学生身上的这些问题。即使所提及的那些化合物真的有助于防止与衰老相关的记忆缺失问题和学习能力下降问题，它们也极不可能也能为学生带来任何的裨益。 总而言之，论述者没能用其提出的论据来说服我们。若要使其论述在逻辑上成立，论述者必须在神经肽的分裂与记忆能力和学习能力的缺失之间证明某种直接的联系。此外，论述者必须证明学生记忆能力差和注意力难以集中均是同一过程造成的，并且研究人员所发现的化合物对人类所产生的效果会对老鼠似乎所产生的效果同样的好。
赞一下 回复此楼
15楼2006-04-06 16:07:49
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
Issue

"It is primarily through identification through social groups that we define ourselves."

Sample Essay

As primarily social animals, human beings naturally seek out different groups to which they feel they have a certain sense of belonging. But there are two different aspects of this issue involved: identifying oneself with a social group for its social implications and identifying oneself with a social group for internal needs. A person can have two different identities, one that involves an individual's self-perception and the way that others see that particular individual. There is a natural dichotomy between the two sides of one's personality that is usually displayed between the different types of social groups with which an individual may identify oneself.

Self-definition can either be honest or dishonest. A person may join a social group because he or she thinks that the people that belong to this type of group are the same as he or she, whether it is true or not. The important detail to the individual is that he or she would like to be the same as the people that belong to this particular social group. As one example, consider a person who grew up poor and poorly educated, but became wealthy through the luck of the lottery or an inheritance from an unknown but wealthy relative. This individual then joins a wine-tasting club and buys season tickets to the local Philharmonic Orchestra and opera house. Although this individual knows nothing about wine, orchestras or opera, he or she is seeking to identify him or herself as a culturally literate person simply because the person is now wealthy. Through joining these social groups, the individual is seeking to define him or herself as socially elite, although the only difference now is that the person has great wealth and in reality probably does not fit in with the other members of the groups. In this case, one's self-definition by identifying with social groups does not match up with how society still identifies the individual.

On the other hand, there are individuals that very clearly demonstrate who they are by their identification with certain social groups. At a very basic level, younger people may join gangs based on a sense of identification with certain gang members or gang ideas. By displaying different identifying tattoos or certain colors, these people clearly identify who they are and what they stand for by the particular to which they belong. Certain religious groups also give a clear identity to their members. Joining an Islamic fundamentalist group such as the Taliban or an Orthodox Jewish organization indicates a certain identity that is common to all of its members. Political organizations such as Greenpeace and the National Organization for Women also make a certain statement about the identity of an individual member. In all of these cases, an individual's self-perception and how others view that individual are probably very similar. These types of organizations speak to a person's very fundamental values and joining one is probably that person's way of saying to the world "this is who I am".
Joining other types of groups may or may not indicate a person's self-identification. Being a Republican or a Democrat, for example, may just be a matter of whichever party your parents belong to. Spending time with a particular group of friends may only mean that you like only one of the people in the group or you have nothing better to do, it may have nothing to do with your self-identification. People that belong to these groups do not necessarily belong to any one social group for identification purposes; it may be only a matter of convenience.

It depends on the individual and the particular social group under discussion as to whether we primarily identify ourselves through association with social groups. Once the individual or the social group has been identified, a determination must still be made as to whether the individual has joined for self-identification purposes or to impress upon others a certain image of that individual.

(656 words)


[题目]

"我们主要通过与社会群体的认同而来界定我们自身。"

[范文正文]

作为具有显著社会性的动物，人类自然会去寻觅某些他们觉得与其存在某种归属感的不同群体。但这个问题涉及两个方面：基于某一社会群体的社会含义而认同该群体，以及出于某些内在需要而认同某一社会群体。一个人可以拥有两个不同的身份，一种身份涉及到个人的自我感受，另一个所涉及的是他人对这个特定个人的看法。在一个人性格的这两方面之间，存在着一种自然的两分法。个人的性格一般就体现在这一个人所可能认同的不同社会群体之间。

自我界定可以是诚实的，亦可以是不诚实的。一个人之所以加入某一社会群体，可能是因为他（她）认为属于这一群体的那些人与他（她）相同，无论这是真还是假。对于这个个人具有重要性的一个细节是，他（她）希望与属于这一特定社会群体的人们相同。例如，我们不妨考虑一下这样一个人，他出身贫穷，没能受过良好的教育，但通过彩票的运气或由于继承了一位无名但却有钱的亲戚的遗产而一夜暴富。此人然后加入一个品酒俱乐部，并购买当地爱乐乐团和歌剧院的季票。虽然此君对酒、乐队或歌剧一窍不通，但他（她）却竭力将自己表现为有文化修养的人，仅仅因为他（她）现在很有钱。通过介入这些社会群体，此人力图将自己界定为社会精英，虽然现在唯一的区分是，这人极其有钱，而实际上他（她）与这些群体内的其他成员格格不入。在此情形中，通过认同某些社会群体而来进行自我界定，这与社会如何看待这个人仍然相去甚远。

另一方面，有些人则通过他们与某些社会群体的认同而明白无误地来表明他们是何种人。在某个甚为基本的层面上，青少年会基于他们与某些帮派成员或帮派理念的认同感而参加某些帮派。通过展示与众不同的认别性纹身图案或某些颜色，这些人明确表明他们是谁，以及他们代表着什么。某些宗教团体也会赋予其成员以某个明白无误的身份。加入诸如塔利班一类的伊斯兰原教旨主义团体或者正统派犹太教组织标志着其成员普遍共有的某种身份。像"绿色和平"以及"全国妇女组织"等政治团体也在就某个个体成员的身份作出某种陈述。在所有这些情形中，个体的自我感受，以及他人对其所形成的看法，二者可能甚为近似。这些类型的组织诉诸于一个人极为基本的价值观，而加入这样的一种组织可能就成为这个人向世界表明"我就是这样一个人"的一种方式。

加入其他类别的组织可能表明，但也不一定表明一个人的自我认同。例如，成为共和党还是民主党成员，这可能只与你父母属于哪个政党有关。与特定一群朋友在一起，这可能只意味着你只喜欢该群体中的一个人，或者因为你除此之外无所事事。这与你的自我认同毫无关系。属于这些群体的人并非必定出于认同的目的而属于任一社会群体。这可能只是一种权宜之计而已。

至于我们是否主要通过与社会群体的联系而来表明我们的身份，这取决于个人以及所涉及的特定社会群体。即使个人或社会群体得以被判明，我们还有待于去确定，一个人加入某一社会群体，究竟是出于自我认同的内在目的呢，还是为了将其个人形象烙在他人心头。
赞一下 回复此楼
16楼2006-04-06 16:08:11
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.


This argument is based on two separate surveys of the citizens of Leeville, conducted by the University of Leeville. In the first survey, most respondents said that their preferred reading material was literary classics. A follow-up study by the same researchers found that mystery novels were the most frequently checked out books from each of the public libraries in Leeville. The arguer concludes that the respondents in the first study therefore misrepresented their own reading habits. This argument does not follow the facts and is therefore unconvincing due to several flaws in logic.

First of all, it is possible that none of the citizens who responded to the first survey were participants in the second survey. Statistically speaking, it is entirely possible that the first survey contained a greater majority of literary classics readers than are present in the general population of Leeville. The difference in the first study and the study of the books that were actually checked out from the library may purely be that the respondents had different interests in literature, therefore disallowing the arguer's conclusion that the first group misrepresented its preferred reading material.

Secondly, it is possible that the difference in the survey results could be attributed to the lack of availability of literary classics in the Leeville public libraries. Simply put, the library may have thousands of mystery novels available for checkout but very few literary classics in their collections. Leeville citizens may actually prefer to read literary classics - the public libraries simply may not have them for the citizens to check out and read. Another possibility is that the Leeville public libraries restrict the checkout of literary classics - perhaps treating the books as a type of "reference" material that must be read inside the library and cannot be checked out. Furthermore, it is possible that no matter how many literary classics the Leeville public libraries have, the citizens have read them all in the past, perhaps many times over, and they are therefore not checked out. These possibilities further weaken the argument that the first respondents misrepresented their reading habits.

Thirdly, literary classics are the type of book that people tend to buy for personal collections rather than checking them out of a library. It is a distinct possibility that the citizens of Leeville purchase literary classics to read and then keep in home libraries rather than checking them out of the library. Leeville citizens may prefer to read literary classics and therefore buy them for their own personal collections, thus checking other types of reading materials out of the library rather than buying them to own forever. The arguer's conclusion that the first set of respondents misrepresented their reading habits is critically weakened by this possibility.

Finally, this argument does not account for the possibility that the survey samples themselves were flawed. There is no indication given about how many people were surveyed, the demographics involved, or the specific locations involved. For example, richer people would tend not to visit public libraries but they are possibly more predisposed to reading literary classics. Similarly, people who visit public libraries may be more predisposed to reading mystery novels than literary classics. Without knowing the relationship between those first surveyed and those who visit the public libraries, it is not possible to draw a proper conclusion about the accuracy of the first group's statements.

In summary, the arguer fails to convince by jumping to a conclusion that fails to hold up to analysis. To strengthen the argument, the arguer needs to find further research that eliminates these other possibilities that preclude the judgment that the first group of respondents misrepresented their reading habits.

(614 words)

　


参考译文


［题目］

"在一项由Leeville大学就Leeville市民阅读习惯所作的研究中，大多数受访对象称,他们偏爱将文学名著作为其阅读材料。但是，由相同的研究人员所作的一项跟踪调查却发现，每个公共图书馆外借得最频繁的图书均为志怪小说类。因此，我们可以得出这样的结论，即第一项研究中的受访对象没能如实地描述出他们的阅读习惯。"


[范文正文]

上述论断基于由Leeville大学对Leeville市民所从事的两项互为独立的调查。在前一项调查中，大多数受访对象称他们较为偏爱的阅读材料是文学名著。由相同的研究人员所作的一项跟踪调查则发现，志怪小说是Leeville市每个公共图书馆外借频率最高的一类图书。论述者便据此得出结论认为，这样看来，第一项研究中的受访对象没能如实地描述他们自己的阅读习惯。这段论述没能遵循事实，因而由于逻辑方面某些缺陷而无从令人置信。

首先，有可能是，对第一项调查作出问卷回答的公民，没有一个人参加了第二项调查。从统计角度而言，完全有可能的情形是，第一项调查涵盖了一个比Leeville总人口中所存在的来得更大的文学名著多数读者群。第一项研究与其后对图书馆实际外借的书所作的那项研究，二者间的差异可能纯粹是因为受访对象对文学拥有全然不同的兴趣，因此否定了论述者所谓第一组受访对象没有如实表述其所喜爱的阅读材料的结论。

其次，两项调查结果之间的差异或许可以归诸于这样一个原因，即Leeville市的公共图书馆内缺乏文学名著。说得简单一点，图书馆可能有数千册志怪小说供外借但却没能收藏多少册文学名著。Leeville市民实际上可能甚是偏爱阅读文学名著，但公共图书馆就是没有此类图书外借供市民阅读。另一个可能性是，Leeville公共图书馆限制文学名著的外借--可能只将这类图书当作"参考"资料，只允许在馆内阅读，不得外借。进一步而言，也有可能是，无论Leeville公共图书馆藏有多少册文学名著，市民们在过去已将它们悉数读完，甚至读过许多遍，因此，这些书便不再有人借阅。这些可能性也进一步削弱了第一组受访对象没有如实表述其阅读习惯的论点。

第三，对于文学名著这类书，人们往往购买来作为个人藏书，而不太倾向于从图书馆借阅。一个显著的可能性是，Leeville市民购买文学名著来阅读并随后将它们收藏于家庭图书馆而不再去公共图书馆借阅。Leeville市民可能喜爱阅读文学名著并因此购置它们作为个人藏书，因此只从图书馆借阅其他类型的阅读材料，而不是去购买这些材料来永久地拥有。论述者关于第一组受访对象没有如实表述其阅读习惯的结论，由于这一可能性而遭到致命的削弱。

最后，这段论述没有解释这样一种可能性，即调查样本本身带有缺陷。论述者没有摆出任何资料表明到底有多少市民接受了调查，或所涉及的人口统计学方法是什么，或所涉及的具体地点。例如，较富有的人往往不太会光顾公共图书馆，但他们可能更喜爱阅读文学名著。同样地，光顾公共图书馆的人可能更喜爱阅读志怪小说而不爱读文学名著。如果不知道第一组受访群体与光顾公共图书馆的群体之间的关系，就不可能就第一组群体的人的陈述的精确性得出一个恰当的结论。

总而言之，论述者没有能说服我们，因为他（她）过于匆促地得出的结论无法经得住推敲。若要使其论点更具分量，论述者需要寻找出进一步的研究，排除掉其他那些会否定掉第一组受访对象没能如实地表述其阅读习惯这一判断的可能性。
赞一下 回复此楼
17楼2006-04-06 16:08:34
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
Issue

"Humanity has made little real progress over the past century or so. Technological innovations have taken place, but the overall condition of humanity is no better. War, violence and poverty are still with us. Technology cannot change the condition of humanity."


Sample Essay

The discussion of this statement turns on what is meant by "little real progress" from the first sentence, "the overall condition of humanity" in the second sentence, and "the condition of humanity" from the third sentence. To be sure, war, violence and poverty are still with us and we as mankind are probably more aware of these problems worldwide than ever before thanks to advances in technology and communication. But depending upon the definition of progress and the condition of humanity, this would appear to be an incorrect statement.

First of all, the phrase "little real progress" from the first sentence must be defined. If the author defines progress as elimination of death, war, violence and poverty, then perhaps it could be stated that humankind has not made much improvement over the past one hundred years. People are still dying, wars are still being fought, violence is present almost everywhere and there are most likely people in every country in the world living in poverty. However, if the term "progress" is defined not as elimination of these problems but rather a reduction in them, then great progress has been made over the past century. Life expectancies are up in nearly every country of the world due to improvements in medicine and the scientific study of the human body. War and violence, although still present, has been reduced and to a large part confined to certain areas of the world rather than the global wars of the past such was World Wars I and II. Poverty has also been reduced as international trade has lead to economic improvements in many formerly impoverished nations. Very real progress has been made in these areas over the past one hundred years.

Secondly, the phrases "the overall condition of humanity" and "the condition of humanity" must be defined. If the terms mean that we are all still born into pain, suffer many tragedies during our lives, and still die in the end, then of course the overall condition of humanity is no better than it was one hundred or even one hundred thousand years ago. Life is still life, and no matter what technological innovations come along, it is unlikely that the basic facts of living as a member of the human race will ever change. However, if the term means how we are able to live our lives during the time that we are given, then again tremendous progress has been made during the past century. Cures have been found for many diseases, some of which have officially been completely eliminated. Medical treatments for other diseases have made them less deadly or less debilitating. For example, many cancer victims that would have died in the past can now go on living comfortably and cancer-free after treatment. Diabetics who would have died in the past can now live nearly normal lives. Even poor eyesight can be effectively eliminated through laser surgery. It would seem to be beyond argument that overall, the condition of humanity is much better now than it was one century ago.

If one takes a very narrow definition of "progress" and "the condition of humanity", it could be fairly stated that mankind has made little in the way of advancement over the past century. Millions of people worldwide still live in poverty. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is killing millions of people with no cure in sight. War and violence continues in the Middle East, Africa and Afghanistan. But to take this narrow point of view would be to ignore the obvious tremendous advances that have been made over the past one hundred years by the human race. As mankind continues on into the twenty-first century, it would be preferable to consider all that has been accomplished over the past one hundred years and to look ahead to future advances over the next century instead of ignoring mankind's obviously improved circumstances today.

(696 words)


观点陈述型作文/[题目]

"在过去约一个世纪的时间中，人类几乎没有实现真正的进步。技术创新确实发生了，但人类的总体状况毫无改观。战争、暴力，以及贫穷仍然伴随着我们。技术无法改善人类的生存状况。"


[范文正文]

上述陈述中的探讨所围绕的是这样三个概念的含义，即第一句中的"little real progress"，第二句中的"the overall condition of humanity"，以及第三句中的"the condition of humanity"。毫无疑问，战争、暴力以及贫穷仍然伴随着我们，并且，作为人类，由于技术与通信的进步，我们可能比以往任何时候都更深切地意识到了这些问题。但除非将"progress"和"the condition of humanity"这样的概念进行清晰界定，否则，上述陈述将是相当谬误的。

首先，第一句中的"little real progress"必须予以界定。如果作者将"progress"定义为祓除死亡、战争、暴力以及贫穷，那么或许可以这样说，人类在过去的100多年中并未取得太大的进展。人们仍在不断死亡，战争仍在进行，暴力几乎到处存在，世界每个国家都有人生活于贫困之中。但是，如果"progress"这一术语并非被定义为对上述问题的消除，而是对这些问题的削减，那么，过去一个世纪中人类确实取得了重大进步。由于医学和对人体科学研究水平的提高，全世界几乎每个国家中人类寿命都呈上升趋势。战争与暴力，虽然仍然存在，却已被减少，且在很大程度上都被限制在世界的某些地区，而再也不是像第一、第二次世界大战那样波及全球。随着国际贸易在许多以前的贫穷国家导致了经济改善，贫困也得以减轻。在过去的100年中，这些领域中已取得了极为真实的进步。其次，"the overall condition of humanity"以及"the condition of humanity"必须予以界定。如果这些术语指的是我们所有人仍然降生于痛苦之中，一生中蒙受着许多悲剧，并最终仍然死去，那么，毫无疑问，人类的总体状况丝毫不比100年或甚至10万年之前来得更好。生活依然是生活，无论产生怎样的技术创新，作为人类的一员，生活的某些基本事实依旧不变。如果该术语指的是我们是如何在被赋予的生存时间中得以生活的，那么我们可以再一次说，人类在过去的世纪中取得了巨大的进步。对许多疾病，人类已找到了治愈方法，某些疾病已正式被彻底消除。对某些疾病的医治已使这些病症变得不再那么致命，不再那么毁灭性。例如，在过去有可能死去的许多癌症患者，现在经治疗之后可继续舒服地生活下去，摆脱癌症的折磨。在过去可能会死去的糖尿病患者，现在也能过上几乎正常的生活。即使视力障碍也能通过激光手术被有效去除。总体而言，人类状况现在远好于一个多世纪之前，这似乎应是不争的事实。 如果从狭义上去理解"progress"和"the condition of humanity"，则人们可以甚为合理地说，人类在过去的一个多世纪中几乎没有取得任何进步。全球数以百万计的人仍生活在贫困之中，爱滋病正在夺走无数人的生命，而治愈方法遥遥无期。战争与暴力在中东,非洲以及阿富汗持续不断。然则，持此狭隘的观点则有可能使人无视人类在过去一百年中业已取得的昭然若揭的巨大进步。随着人类继续迈进21世纪，较为可取的做法应该是，我们应充分意识到在过去100年中人类业已取得的全部成就，并展望人类在下一个世纪中所可能取得的未来进步，而不是对人类今日显著改善的生存状况视而不见，置若罔闻。
赞一下 回复此楼
18楼2006-04-06 16:08:50
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

blueseashore

铁虫 (小有名气)
A recent study shows that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia. Interestingly, Asians, on average, eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. It turns out that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which have been found to possess disease-preventing properties. Thus, North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression.


In this argument, the arguer cites a study showing that North Americans suffer from an amazingly higher rate of chronic fatigue and chronic depression than people living in Asia. From an unknown source, the arguer states that Asians eat much more soy than North Americans, who eat almost none, and that soy contains disease-preventing properties. The arguer then concludes his or her argument by stating that North Americans should consider regularly eating soy as a means of battling fatigue and depression. This argument suffers from at least four critical fallacies.

For the sake of this argument, we will assume that the studies and the statistics about North Americans' and Asians' soy eating habits are correct, and that isoflavones have been found to have disease-fighting properties. Given that, there is still a problem with the arguer directly correlating the eating of soy with the prevention of disease and depression. First of all, simply because soy may have disease-preventing properties, that does not mean that it can therefore fight chronic fatigue and chronic depression. Fatigue and depression may not actually even be considered as "diseases", therefore even given the fact that soy has disease-fighting properties, it would have no effect on the "nondiseases" of fatigue and depression. Secondly, even assuming that fatigue and depression are diseases, they are not specifically mentioned as diseases that soy or isoflavones are able to prevent. Perhaps soy can help prevent osteoporosis (bone loss), mumps or even chicken pox, but that does not mean that it can specifically address the problems of chronic fatigue and chronic depression. These two critical weaknesses alone make the argument unconvincing.

Furthermore, the arguer's conclusion is based on the idea that diet alone can prevent fatigue and depression by comparing the diets of North Americans and Asians. It is highly unlikely that diet alone is responsible for the tremendous difference in the rates of fatigue and depression between the two populations. Other factors such as lifes, occupations, residence in city or rural areas and levels of stress may play a much bigger factor than diet. Additionally, the arguer states that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which supposedly have disease-preventing properties. What is not stated, however, is whether these isoflavones are contained in a form in soy that is usable by the human body. It is possible that the particular configuration of the phytochemicals found in soy products is not usable by the human body, thereby producing no beneficial effects by people eating more soy products. In and of themselves, isoflavones may prevent certain diseases, but perhaps those found in soy are of no benefit to humans. By failing to address these possibilities, the arguer has presented an unconvincing argument.

In summary, the argument fails due to four major flaws in logic. First, "disease-preventing" properties does not mean "fatigue and depression" preventing properties. Secondly, fatigue and depression may not even be considered as diseases. Thirdly, the arguer ignores the probability that diet alone is not the sole reason behind the increased rates of fatigue and depression for North Americans as opposed to Asians. Finally, isoflavones as found in soy may not produce the same beneficial effects as when it is found in other forms. To strengthen the argument and conclusion, the arguer should present evidence that directly links diet to fatigue and depression as well as evidence that shows that soy can specifically prevent chronic fatigue and chronic depression in North Americans.

(576 words)

　


参考译文
[题目]

一项最近的研究表明，居住在北美大陆上的人们要比居住在亚洲大陆上的人们患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例分别超出9倍和31倍。有意思的是，亚洲人平均每天只吃20克的大豆，而北美洲人却几乎一点都不吃。研究表明，大豆含有被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，这些植物化学物经科学家研究，发现拥有防病特性。因此，北美洲人应该考虑经常性地吃大豆，以此作为一种防止疲劳和压抑的方法。　


[范文正文]

在本段论述中，论述者援引了一项研究来证明，北美洲人患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例要比居住在亚洲的人令人惊讶地高。从一项来源不明的资料中，作者陈述道，亚洲人所吃的大豆要远多于北美人，而北美人则几乎一点都不吃，而大豆却含有防病的特性。论述者在其论述的结束处陈述首，北美人应考虑经常性地吃些大豆，以此作为一种抗疲劳和抗忧郁的方法。本段论述至少犯下了四个关键性的逻辑谬误。

为了论述的缘故，我们假定关于北美人和亚洲人吃大豆的习惯这方面的研究和数据是完全正确的，并且异黄酮确实被科学家发现具有防病功效。即使在承认这些条件的情况下，论述者将食用大豆与防止疾病和抵抗忧郁直接联系起来，这一做法本身仍存在着问题。首先，即使大豆有可能具备防病特性，但这并非意味着它因此就能抵抗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。疲倦和忧郁实际上甚至还不可能被视作"疾病"，因此，尽管大豆具有防病作用属实，但它对于疲倦和忧郁这些"非疾病"可能毫无作用。其次，即使我们假定疲倦和忧郁可被视为疾病，但它们没有被具体提到是属于大豆或异黄酮所能预防的那类病症。或许，大豆可以预防骨质疏松症，流行性腮腺炎或甚至是水痘，但这并非意味着它能具体地治疗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症这样一些问题。这二个关键性的弱点本身就足以使得该论述缺乏可信度。

进而言之，论述者的结论所依据的是这样一个理念，即通过比较北美人和亚洲人的饮食，饮食本身可以来防止疲倦和忧郁。但很难想象饮食本身造成了两类人口之间患上疲倦和忧郁症比例方面的巨大差异。其他诸多因素，如生活方式，职业，居住在都市还是乡村，以及压力程度所产生的影响可能要比饮食大得多。此外，论述者陈述道，大豆含有一种可被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，据称具有防病功效。但论述者没有作出陈述，即这些异黄酮是否是以一种被人体使用的方式被包含在大豆中。有可能是，大豆产品中所发现的植物化学物，其特定的结构并不能为人体所利用，从而对食用较多大豆产品的人并不能产生任何益处。就其本身而言，异黄酮或许可能预防某些疾病，但大豆中所发现的异黄酮对人类毫无益处，这也是有可能的。由于没有探究这些可能性，论述者所摆出的这段论述便失去了说服力。

总的说来，本段论述因为四大逻辑缺陷而难以站得住脚。首先，"防病"特性并不能等同于"疲倦和忧郁症"预防特性。其次，疲倦和忧郁甚至还不能被视为疾病。第三，论述者忽视了这样一种可能性，即饮食本身并不是造成北美人相对于亚洲人疲倦与忧郁症比例上升的唯一原因。最后，大豆中所被发现的异黄酮可能并不能产生与在其他形式中所发现的异黄酮相同的益处。若要增强其论点和结论的力度，论述者应该拿出证据，将饮食与疲倦及忧郁直接联系起来，且提供证据来证明大豆能具体地防止北美人的慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。
赞一下 回复此楼
19楼2006-04-06 16:09:18
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

可可西里

1

20楼2006-07-22 08:27:27
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 blueseashore 的主题更新
202/2返回列表上一页12
普通表情 龙 兔 虎 猫 高级回复 (可上传附件)
最具人气热帖推荐 [查看全部] 作者 回/看 最后发表
[基金申请] 投票:  有多少人是今天查系统知道结果的？ +15 爱看书的可乐 2026-08-26 17/850 2026-08-27 19:18 by xxniao123
[基金申请] 为什么资助数各大高校都创新高，自己申请怎么就这么难 +8 Kittylucky 2026-08-27 8/400 2026-08-27 18:33 by raiy123
[基金申请] 基金未中，这种答复是模板吗？ +5 zhaosm1982 2026-08-27 6/300 2026-08-27 16:00 by lfy8008
[基金申请] 面上合作单位盖章 +3 ssyjh 2026-08-27 3/150 2026-08-27 09:59 by 阿拉贡aragon
[基金申请] 让我中一个面上吧！ +13 大萍1987 2026-08-20 17/850 2026-08-27 08:20 by 大萍1987
[基金申请] 2026国自然函评费到账 +22 羊腰板 2026-08-21 25/1250 2026-08-26 15:00 by zuocuiping
[基金申请] 2026年8月25日国自然放榜前突然收到列入评审专家邮件，有关系吗？ +25 木水思豆 2026-08-25 28/1400 2026-08-26 14:53 by draco1987
[基金申请] 出来了 +9 trojank 2026-08-26 9/450 2026-08-26 14:25 by 宝贝虫子
[基金申请] 为什么国自然不能直接公布 +4 bjdxyxy 2026-08-26 4/200 2026-08-26 13:12 by qingmu1201
[基金申请] 国合里面能看到了 +7 一怀馨秋 2026-08-26 7/350 2026-08-26 11:23 by zhaosm1982
[基金申请] 国际合作可查了，中了面上 (EPI+1)(金币+50) +18 Ldrop2023 2026-08-26 18/900 2026-08-26 11:15 by cmrandy
[基金申请] 项目信息和经费信息在系统里都可以看到了 +6 wittyboy 2026-08-26 14/700 2026-08-26 10:55 by wittyboy
[基金申请] 国合可查了 +3 paperzjh 2026-08-26 3/150 2026-08-26 10:41 by LemmonTr
[职场人生] 学生撞见辅导员送外卖，第二天全班都沉默了 +3 鲸鱼融金_浙江_� 2026-08-22 3/150 2026-08-26 09:01 by zzuzxg
[基金申请] 国合现在查不到了吗？ +10 chengyan1220 2026-08-24 20/1000 2026-08-26 08:57 by peasantsprig
[基金申请] 如果此刻你正在为国基感到焦虑，不妨来听听这首《基金之外》 +8 scalable 2026-08-24 8/400 2026-08-25 12:52 by jnhyjjm
[基金申请] 没有任何消息-是不是就凉了 +9 图啦图啦 2026-08-24 10/500 2026-08-25 11:59 by 南海小哥
[基金申请] 我面上完蛋了 +13 且听虎啸 2026-08-20 14/700 2026-08-25 09:10 by mrkang
[基金申请] 应该是下周三26日公布了吧？ +4 哈哈蛤？ 2026-08-21 4/200 2026-08-21 10:58 by Vivilian
[基金申请] 基金啊基金 +4 longfie172 2026-08-20 4/200 2026-08-21 08:58 by mark mao
信息提示
关闭
请填处理意见
关闭