Issue写作范文详细解析整合

若水1147 分享 时间:

今天给大家带来了Issue写作范文详细解析,快来一起学习吧。下面小编就和大家分享,来欣赏一下吧。

Issue写作范文详细解析

Topic

The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine:"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."

Sample Essay

In this argument, the writer of the letter concludes that global pollution of water and air has caused a decline in the number of amphibians worldwide. To support his or her conclusion, the writer cites the results of two studies, seventy-five years apart, that purportedly show that the number of amphibians in one park in California, Yosemite National Park, have drastically declined. Additionally, the writer casts aside a given reason for the decline, stating that the introduction of trout to the park (who are known to eat amphibian eggs) does not explain the worldwide decline in the number of amphibians. This argument defies simple logic and suffers from several critical fallacies.

First of all, the argument is based on only two studies in one specific part of the world, Yosemite National Park in California. It is impossible to pinpoint a worldwide theory for the decline of amphibians based on any number of studies in only one specific location in the world - the specific varieties of amphibians, geographical conditions and other location specific variables prohibit such a sweeping generalization. One very specific location cannot be used as a model for all other locations, even within one particular country, let alone the entire world. The writer provides no evidenced whatsoever that links the Yosemite study with any purported effects anywhere else in the global environment.

Secondly, the two separate studies were done seventy-five years apart. There is no evidence that the two studies were conducted in a similar manner over the same duration of time or even over the same exact areas of Yosemite National Park, or that the exact same study methods were used. For example, perhaps the first study lasted over an entire year and was conducted by twenty-five experts in amphibious biology, resulting in the finding of seven species of amphibians in abundant numbers. By contrast, perhaps the second study was conducted over a period of one week by a lone high school student as a school science project. The writer offers no basis on which to compare the two studies, leaving it open as to whether the two are truly comparable in their breadth, scope and expertise.

Finally, the writer notes that the decline in the amphibian population has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters in 1920, but then dismisses that argument on the purely specious basis that it does not explain the worldwide decline. This part of the argument blithely dismisses the very relevant fact that trout are known to eat amphibian eggs. This attempt to "prove a negative" is the last resort of those in search of some vain attempt to prove the truth of the matter that they are asserting. It is basically impossible to "prove a negative"; this is an attempt to shift the burden of proof back on to the nonbelievers of the argument. The global environmental situation and that of Yosemite National Park are not perfectly correlated, and the fact that the trout may very well be responsible for the decline cannot simply be dismissed without further proof.

In summary, the writer fails to establish any causal relationship between global air and water pollution and the decline of amphibious life worldwide. The evidence presented is extremely weak at best and narrowly focuses on one tiny area of the globe, as well as putting forward as proof two studies about which almost nothing is known. For a stronger argument, the writer would need to directly put forth evidence associating air and water pollution with not only the decline at Yosemite but also throughout other areas of the world.(599 words)

[题目]

下述文字摘自一封致某环保杂志编辑的信函:"全球两栖动物数量的减少明显标志着全球性水与大气的污染。对加利福尼亚州约塞米蒂国家公园内两栖动物所作的两项研究可证实我的这一结论。1915年公园内有七个物种的两栖动物,每一物种都拥有丰富的种群数量。然而,1992年,在公园内所能观察到的两栖动物物种仅为四类,且每一物种的种群数量已骤然下降。约塞米蒂公园动物数量减少被归咎于始于1920年的将鲑鱼引入公园水域的做法(众所周知,鲑鱼喜食两栖动物所产的卵)。但鲑鱼的引入不可能成为约塞米蒂公园动物数量减少的真正原因,因为它无法来解释全球范围内的动物数量减少。"

[范文正文]

在本项论述中,信函作者的结论是,全球性水与大气污染已致使世界范围内两栖动物的数量减少。为了支持其论点,作者援引了两份时隔75年之久的研究结果,这两份结果据称可证明加利福尼亚州某一公园――即约塞米蒂国家公园――内两栖动物的数量锐减。此外,该作者撇开了动物数量减少的一个已知原因,陈述道,将鲑鱼引入公园(据称,鲑鱼喜食两栖动物所产的卵)这一做法不足以解释世界范围内两栖动物数量上的减少。这一论点有悖于简单的逻辑,犯有一系列关键性的逻辑谬误。

首先,该论点所依据的仅仅是世界上某一特定地点――即加利福尼亚州约塞米蒂国家公园――内的两份研究。围绕着两栖动物数量减少这一问题,如果仅以世界上一个特定的地点为样品,再多数量的研究也无法得出一种精确的、适用于全世界的理论。两栖动物的具体种类、地理状况以及其他因地点而特异的变数均不允许我们作出如此一概而论的总括。一个非常具体的地点不能用作一个代表所有其他地点的模型,即使在一个特定的国家内也不行,更不用说在整个世界范围内了。信函作者没有提供任何证据将约塞米蒂公园的研究与全球环境中任何其他一处地方的任何所宣称的效果联系起来。 其次,所提及的那两项互为独立的研究时隔75年之久。没有证据可证明这两项研究是在相同的时间跨度内以相似的方式进行的,或是在约塞米蒂公园完全相同的地点进行的,或所使用的研究方法绝然相同。

例如,第一项研究可能持续了整整一年之久,且是由两栖动物生物学领域的二十五位专家共同进行的。结果是发现了七大种类数目众多的两栖动物。相反,第二项研究可能是一位高中生孤身一人所做的学校的一个科学课题,仅为期一个星期。信函作者没有提供将此两项研究进行比较的基础,从而使两项研究在其广度、范围以及专业水准方面的可比性不得而知。 最后,信函作者指出,两栖动物种群数量的减少,已被人归咎于1920年将鲑鱼引入公园水域这一做法,但紧接着又以该论据无法解释世界范围内动物数量减少这一似是而非的依据将该论据予以否认。信函作者论述中的这一部分漫不经心地将一个极为相关的事实弃置不顾,即众所周知,鲑鱼喜食两栖动物所产的卵。这种"prove a negative "的尝试往往是这样一类人所惯用的最后伎俩,他们竭力寻找某种徒劳的尝试,力图去证明他们所宣称的事物的真理。从根本上讲,"prove a negative"是不可能的。这样一种做法是试图将论证的负担重新转嫁给不相信该论据的人。全球的环境情形与约塞米蒂公园的情形并不绝然对应。鲑鱼极有可能造成了两栖动物数量减少这一事实在缺乏进一步证据的情况下是断不能轻易予以否认的。

概括而言,信函作者没能在全球空气和水污染与世界范围内两栖生命数量减少之间建立起任何因果关系。该作者所拿出的证据充其量也是极为苍白无力的,狭隘地将焦点集中在世界的一片极小的区域上,作为证据而援引的两项研究几乎不能说明任何问题。欲使其论点更具力度,信函作者尚需摆出直接的证据,将水和空气污染不仅仅与约塞米蒂公园的两栖动物数量减少联系起来,而且也与世界其他地方的动物数量减少联系起来。

Issue写作范文详细解析

Issue

"Colleges and universities should offer more courses on popular music, film, advertising and television because contemporary culture has much greater relevance for students than do arts and literature of the past."

Sample Essay

To the extent that contemporary culture is, by definition, current, it does have a much more immediate impact on students and people in general than do the arts and literature of the past. Contemporaneous events directly affect everyone alive at the time because they are occurring at precisely the same time as the individual's existence. But to paraphrase a famous philosopher: "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." To a great extent, past arts and literature shape who we are as people at least as much as, if not more than, contemporary culture does.

Everyone alive today is affected in one way or another by the events of the past. Past events have directly led to the way that the world is shaped today. The arts and literature are one of the most well-preserved and documented resources that can give us a direct link into what actually happened in the past. Consider the religious writings of the Bible, the Koran and those of Confucius, as well as those related to Buddhism, Hinduism and all other religions. These writings directly relate to, and in some cases to a great extent control, the behavior of human beings today even though most were written hundreds if not thousands of years ago. Artworks relating to these religions also have a profound effect. Consider Michelangelo's work in the Sistine Chapel at the Vatican, or the vast myriad of historic Buddhist statues throughout Asia, or the ancient Muslim mosques throughout the Middle East and Central Asia. It would be difficult to argue that contemporary culture has more relevance to today's students when compared with the relevance of these examples of past arts and literature.

At times it is difficult to determine what exactly is the difference between contemporary culture and the arts and literature of the past. Shakespeare's classic writings are continuously being adapted into current movies that are often big hits with students and the general population as a whole. Millions of people every year view classic works of art in museums all over the world. Readings of religious texts have never gone out of style with a large part of the world's population. Clashes between centuries-old cultures and religions, such as that of Western countries and Islamic extremists and that of Hindus and Muslims in India, demonstrate that the religious artifacts that could be called arts and literature of the past are very much a part of contemporary culture.

While the past can certainly not be ignored, a large part of what students must learn at university is based on contemporary culture. Most religious learning, at least of one's own religion, occurs either at home or early on in a student's education. At the university level, studies of politics, business and the computer sciences must deal in great detail with the latest advances in contemporary culture in order to remain up to date and relevant. Other subjects, such as mathematics, agriculture, and the arts and literature themselves look largely to the past for the core knowledge that is taught in these courses. The application of these lessons from the past are entirely appropriate to help put contemporary culture into some type of historical context that can help students to understand and comprehend the rapidly changing world that they are living in.

It would seem self-evident that a properly educated university student must find a balance between studying contemporary culture without neglecting the study of arts and literature of the past. The study of one is not mutually exclusive of the study of the other. The benefits of a well-rounded education come from not only knowing the state of the world as it exists today but also in knowing how the world arrived at this stage of development in the first place.

观点陈述型作文/[题目]

"学院和大学应该开设更多通俗音乐、电影、广告和电视方面的课程,因为当代文化要比昔日的艺术和文学对于学生具有远为密切的联系。"

[范文正文]

只要当代文化——依照其定义——具有当代性,它无疑比昔日的艺术和文学对学生乃至普通大众具有一种远为直接的影响。同时代的事件会直接影响到生活在那一时代的每一个人,因为它们的发生与这个人的生存正值同时。但这里我们可以复述一位著名哲学家的话,"那些无法从历史中汲取教训者注定会重蹈覆辙".在相当大的程度上,昔日的艺术和文学造就了我们现如今的情状,其作用即使并不甚于当代文化,至少与当代文化相同。 生活于当今时代的每个人以一种或另一种方式深受过去事件的影响。昔日的事件直接导致了世界目前的运转方式。艺术和文学是保存和记载得最为完善的一种资源,它们能使我们与过去实际发生过的事情直接联系起来。 不妨考虑一下《圣经》,《可兰经》一类的宗教著作,孔子的著述,以及那些与佛教、印度教和所有其他宗教相关的著作。这些直接地与当今时代人们的行为相关,并在某些情形中在相当大的程度上控制着当今时代人们的行为,虽然它们大多数创作于数百年、甚至数千年之前。与这些宗教相关的艺术品同样也产生了深远的影响。我们不妨考虑一下梵蒂冈西斯廷教堂内米开朗琪罗的作品,或遍布亚洲的无数具有历史性意义的佛教像,或者散布在整个中东和中亚地区的古代穆斯林清真寺。与这些过去的艺术和文学实例的相关性相比,当代文化被说成与当今学生更密切相关,这一论点是难以成立的。

有些时候,人们难以确定当代文化与过去的艺术和文学的差异究竟何在。莎士比亚的经典之作不断地被改编成当代电影,常常能成为学生和普通大众的大热门。每年,全世界数百万人在博物馆观赏古典艺术作品。宗教文本的阅读对于世界相当大的一部分人口而言从来就不失为一种风尚。数个世纪古老的文化与宗教之间的冲突,如西方国家与伊斯兰极端主义者之间的冲突,以及印度国内印度教徒与穆斯林教徒之间的冲突,例证着那些可被称为昔日艺术和文学的宗教事物在很大程度上实乃当代文化的一部分。

虽然过去无疑不能被淡忘,但学生在大学中所学内容,很大一部分是基于当代文化的。大多数宗教学习,至少一个人自身的宗教的学习,或始于家庭,或始于学生受教育的早期。在大学这一层次上,对政治、商科以及计算机科学的学习,与当代文化中的最新进步深深相涉,以便使人与时俱进,与时代紧密相关。其它的学科,如数学、农业、艺术与文学,很大程度上是从过去的源泉获取这些课程中所传授的核心知识。这些来自过去的课程的应用完全是恰当的,有助于将当代文化置于某种历史架构之中,去帮助学生领略和理解他们所生活于其中的那个变化迅速的世界。

有一点似乎是不证自明的,即一个受过恰当教育的大学生必须在学习当代文化与不偏废昔日艺术和文学之间寻找到某种平衡。对两者的学习并非互为排斥。一种综合全面的教育,其益处不仅在于让人知道当今世界所处的状态,而且亦在于首先要让人弄清世界是何以抵达目前这一发展阶段的。

Issue写作范文详细解析

Topic

The following is a letter to the editor of the Atticus City newspaper

"Former Mayor Durant owes an apology to the city of Atticus. Both the damage to the River Bridge, which connects Atticus to Hartley, and the traffic problems we have long experienced on the bridge were actually caused 20 years ago by Durant. After all, he is the one who approved the construction of the bridge. If he had approved a wider and better-designed bridge, on which approximately the same amount of public money would have been spent, none of the damage or problems would have occurred. Instead, the River Bridge has deteriorated far more rapidly over the past 20 years than has the much longer Derby Bridge up the river. Even though the winters have been severe in the past several years, this is no excuse for the negligence and wastefulness of Durant."

Sample Essay

The author of this letter concludes in his or her argument that former Mayor Durant should apologize to the city of Atticus because he is at fault for damage that has occurred over a twenty-year time span to the River Bridge. The author also blames Mayor Durant for long-time traffic problems on the bridge, stating that Durant actually caused these problems twenty years before because he approved the construction of the bridge and did not approve a wider and better-designed bridge. The arguer may have a personal vendetta against Mayor Durant but the elements stated in the argument do not support such an accusation.

First of all, the author squarely places blame on Mayor Durant for the simple act of approving the construction of the bridge. There is no evidence presented that merely approving the building of the bridge had anything whatsoever to do with the damage that has occurred or the traffic problems on the bridge. It is entirely possible that Mr. Durant simply approved the idea of constructing the bridge and not the design of the bridge or the contractor that built it. Simply approving the construction of the bridge does not in and of itself cause damage to that bridge or any resulting traffic problems.

In addition, the arguer concludes that if Mayor Durant had approved a wider and better-designed bridge that there would be no damage or traffic problems, an argument for which there is no basis of proof offered. It is a well-known fact that bridges are subject to deterioration, particularly over a period of twenty years, no matter how well designed they may be. The author also fails to offer any supporting evidence to show that a more durable bridge with fewer traffic problems could have been built for approximately the same amount of public money. It seems likely that a wider bridge would have more damage problems rather than fewer, and probably would have cost more as well, whether public or private funds were used.

Furthermore, the arguer mentions that the River Bridge has deteriorated much more rapidly than the much longer Derby Bridge up the river. This groundless argument fails to take into account other possible reasons for the discrepancy in the deterioration of the two bridges such as traffic loads, location and other environmental variables. It is possible that the Derby Bridge was much more protected from the elements and rarely used by heavy truck traffic, for example. The author gives no basis for a direct comparison between the two bridges other than his or her personal opinion.

Finally, the letter writer refers to the "negligence and wastefulness" of Mayor Durant. The only action cited by the author is the approval of the bridge in the first place, which proves neither neglect nor wasting of anything. The sentence itself contains a non sequitur - firstly discussing the severe winters of the past several years, and then accusing Mr. Durant of waste and neglect. This accusation is unwarranted as well as unsupported in the author's argument.

In summary, the author simply makes groundless accusations without providing any real support for his or her argument. To make the argument convincing, the author would have to provide evidence that Mayor Durant approved a faulty bridge design or an unqualified construction company that caused the bridge's damage and traffic problems. The author should have also provided supporting details that show that the damage to the bridge is out of the ordinary and directly caused by Mayor Durant's decision to use inadequate construction materials or a poor design. Without more support, the author's point of view is unconvincing and not well reasoned.

(605 words)

[题目]

下述文字乃一封致《Atticus都市报》的信函:"前市长Durant应向全体Atticus 市民道歉。无论是将Atticus 市和Hartley市连结起来的跨河大桥所遭到的毁坏,还是我们在大桥上长期以来所经历的交通问题,实际上都是由Durant 市长在20年之前一手铸成的。无论如何,是他批准了大桥的开工建设。如果他所批准建设的大桥更宽一些,设计得更精良一些,而所投入其上的公共款项大致相等的话,那么,无论是大桥的受损,还是交通拥堵问题均不会发生。然则,在过去20年期间,跨河大桥现在则远比上游河段上长度远长得多的Derby河大桥更为快速地遭到毁损。尽管过去几年中冬天的日子甚为严酷,但我们绝不能原谅Durant 市长的玩忽职守和浪费。"

[范文正文]

本信函的作者在其论述中得出结论,认为前市长Durant 应向Atticus全市作出正式道歉,因为对于过去20年中跨河大桥所遭受的损坏他应引咎自责。作者亦责怪Durant市长造成了大桥上长期以来的交通问题。作者陈述道,由于Durant市长批准了现在这座大桥的开工建设,而没有批准一座更宽、设计更精良的大桥,故他在20年之前实际上就已铸成了上述这些问题。提出这些论点的作者可以对Durant市长有此个人怨仇,但论述中所陈述的各项内容并不能为这样一种责怪提供依据。

首先,作者斩钉截铁地将罪责归咎于Durant市长,仅仅因为他批准了大桥的建造这一行为本身。但作者没能提供证据证明,仅仅只是批准该座大桥的建造这一行为与大桥本身所遭受的毁坏或大桥上的交通问题有任何必然的联系。完全有可能的是,Durant先生仅仅只是准许了建造这座大桥的想法,而并没有认可该大桥的设计或建造该大桥的承包商。纯粹去批准大桥的建造,这一行为就其本身而言并不会导致大桥受毁或造成任何交通问题。

此外,论述者得出结论,认为如果Durant市长批准建造一座更宽、设计更精良的大桥的话,则既不会发生大桥受损,也不会有交通拥堵的问题。对于该论据,论述者也没有提出任何证明依据。一个众所周知的事实是,所有桥梁的状况都会每况愈下,尤其是经历了20年这样长的时间之后,无论它们当时设计得是如何精良。信函作者也没能提供任何能起到支持作用的证据来证明,人们可以用大致同等数量的公共款项建起一座更为持久的、交通问题更少的大桥。有可能的是,一座桥面更宽的大桥所遭受的损坏可能更多,而非更少。也有可能是,所投入的资金将更大,无论所使用的是公共款项还是私人资金。

再者,论述者提到跨河大桥比上游河段更长的Derby大桥老化的速度来得快。这一毫无根据的论点没能考虑到导致两座大桥老化状况差异的其他有可能的因素,如交通负荷、桥址、以及其他环境方面的变数。例如,Derby大桥受到了更好的保护,受自然因素影响较少,很少有重型卡车类的交通工具通过其上。除了其武断的个人看法以外,信函作者没有拿出任何依据来在两座大桥之间作出直接的比较。

最后,信函作者提及Durant市长的"玩忽职守及浪费".该作者所援引的有关Durant市长的唯一的所作所为仅是早先时候对大桥建造的批准,而这一点既不能证明任何的玩忽职守,也不能证明任何浪费。该句子本身包含了一个不根据前提的推理——首先讨论过去几年中气候严酷的冬天,紧接着责怪Durant先生的浪费与疏忽。在作者的论述中,这一谴责既无正当理由,也缺乏依据。

概而言之,信函作者所做的只是提出一些毫无根据的责怪,而没有拿出任何真正的依据来证明其论点。要使其论点更具说服力,该作者应拿出证据来证明,Durant市长所批准的是一份有严重失误的大桥建设设计方案,或一个没有资质的建筑公司,从而导致了大桥的受毁和交通问题。该作者也应该提供有支持作用的细节,以表明大桥受损程度超乎寻常,并且是因为Durant市长决定使用劣质建筑材料或采用了一份蹩脚的设计方案而直接造成的。在没有更为充分的依据这一条件下,该作者的论点无法令人置信,并且也显得没有得到充分的论证。

Issue写作范文详细解析相关文章:

1.托福写作范文附思路解析最新整合

2.2020托福写作范文附思路解析最新汇总

3.商务英语高级写作

4.托福独立写作逻辑断层问题如何解决

5.托福独立写作时间不够用如何提速

Issue写作范文详细解析整合

今天给大家带来了Issue写作范文详细解析,快来一起学习吧。下面小编就和大家分享,来欣赏一下吧。Issue写作范文详细解析TopicThe following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine:The
推荐度:
点击下载文档文档为doc格式
285755