I48 & A50
[font=Times New Roman]这是昨天写的，第二次了。用时仍然很多，感觉自己打字还是很慢。内容方面，Issue的例子又重复现象，比较匮乏::z8 。Argue的逻辑可能有一点乱，但自己觉得还是可以接受的。[/font] j]9[$?1v'nx[font=Times New Roman][/font] !HAM@^ |
[font=Times New Roman]TOPIC: ISSUE 48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."[/font]
[font=Times New Roman]WORDS: 511h W+V NWN1xQI
TIME: 1:43:49hU;U9o$u I y`
DATE: 2008-7-7[/font] z6LnF+l M_
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]+y-b7r(e(z X:h
[font=Times New Roman]Reading history books, we can always get acquainted with the names of the great who is regarded as the symbols of important events. However when history events happened, it is not only by the power of some few famous men, but also contributed by groups of people though their names may not be found probably. Yet the number of these groups of people were too large to identify every of their figures. Therefore in history studying the point we pay attention to about these people is the common characters they had or the classes they were in the society.[/font]/T;@Qy dc W s
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman]According to German philosopher Marx's theory about history and society developing, the tremendous amount of ordinary people are the composer of history actually because for most events in the past it is impossible to have any chance to gestate without the ordinary people's working and acting, not to mention the happening of the events. For instance, we all know the famous character like Washington in American Revolution who is the great leader during the war and the first president in America. His competence, humility, selflessness and other merit has long been extolled. But without the common soldiers and citizens, could he bring liberty to the nation? I do not believe so. Take another look at Normandy Landing, the critical campaign during the World War II. Could the leaders and commanders make it success without all that bleeding and sacrifices of those [color=blue]ordinary[/color] soldiers? I do not believe it too. Common people may just be common people, but they fight for freedom, virtue, human progress and so forth. They are the basic and the root of history event, and the event would not have fruitage free from the common people.[/font]#P&z0eq l9}6_
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman]On the other hand, we can observe that almost in any event there is at least a key person who is going to be regarded among the famous few in record of history. In my point of view, this is because that the famous few have a special effect in processing the events. People's activities need to be lead by leaders or there will not be any organizing or disciplines and the event cannot be attained if every individual act as their own thought with no cooperation. Just as a parable says, an ant is tiny, while ants act for one goal to fulfill the queen ant's need. And in that way they become strong and their group become thrived. To human, it is the same law.[color=blue] Therefore, the famous few are not dispensable either.[/color][/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman]Yet in history studying, it is impossible to memorize all people's identities and there is no need to do so. The amount is too huge to record and learning every signal identity has little meaning for that those details do not have much influence in history processing.[/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman]In sum, the most significant events and trends in history were made possible by both the famous few and groups of common people. Neither of them is dispensable. Yet in History studying, we do not have to acquire all the identities.[/font] a3FR#^2Q6L
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman] ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 ::z1 [/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]9p |$q0d:A$xq
[font=Times New Roman]TOPIC: ARGUMENT 150 - The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine. [/font]k*TBWV p E S @
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]r6y C+A#u8S Z!y b IM
[font=Times New Roman]"The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."[/font]
[font=Times New Roman]WORDS: 299
TIME: 1:02:15|!W6v;f.t'i
DATE: 2008-7-7[/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]f lj JQL r
[font=Times New Roman]The letter argues that water and air is polluted globally. To support the argument, the letter cited a study of amphibians' decline in species number and in number of each species in Yosemite Park in California. However in my view, this letter is logically flawed in several respects.[/font]m d H\v4J!N$} a!I
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman]First of all,
the study in 1992 cannot fully convince me that the species of amphibians were decreased because it statistics might be caused by uncompleted investigation. And we have no idea whether the two surveys were in the same method. The letter said nothing about all these important details. [/font]
[font=Times New Roman] [/font] kI V&l6EJ Z9k
[font=Times New Roman]Moreover, even if the study and the statistics are convincible, we cannot see any evidence in the letter showing that the decline of amphibians is world wide. It is suspicious that the conditions in California can represent the situation all over the world. Maybe amphibians' number increased in other parts of the world while decreased in Yosemite Park. [/font]~B4\@9G rB
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]R${8jI at(q3ZQ
[font=Times New Roman]Finally, even if all the conditions above are tenable, that is to say the number of amphibians was declining worldwide, the letter offered no evidence that the decline had anything to do with the global pollution, not to mention in water and air. It is entirely possible that amphibian number's declining is because they were in their natural cycle of low number, or other possible reason while the water and the air are just the same as before. The letter did not exclude all those possibilities but to take pollution for granted.[/font]'kihBi+W N({:@
[font=Times New Roman] [/font]
[font=Times New Roman]In conclusion we cannot see the pollution is happening only according to the letter's evidences and proof. To confirm the pollution in water and air , the letter had better inform some direct facts and numbers of the water and air's conditions now and the criteria about what’s considered as polluted.[/font] argu字数再多些比较好
回复 2# wangwuyi 的帖子
恩，是的，谢谢页:
[1]