2006年08月26日

Without a suitable shoe, I went to Shenge Sports to buy one. Admittedly, the shoes I wore today is somewhat unable to do their jobs and according to the theory — the shoes are the first judgement of a man — which may work, I have to confess that I didn’t look like a man who would afford an pair of expensive shoes and indeed, I am not. However, I think I have enough money to buy one pair in this sports goods mall.

The moment I entered this mall, I found that theory works. Salesmen in this mall firstly looked at my shoes and in my opinion, they had finished the judgement and determined not to serve me. In this mall with tens of shops displayed in three floors, only one salesman commendate their shoes to me. As a result, in the jealous expression of salesmen of other shops, she said "patronage again" to me after I selected one suitable shoes from her shop.

What does this tell me?

Never judge ur customer by their appearance no matter they are seemingly rich or poor. Yes, I am not somebody who can patron them a lot, yet no such treat should happen on one who is like me. Remember, customer is God… Furthermore, this conclusion applies to many situations and I have to absort the experience avoiding of making bad impressions on others.

2006年08月11日

Issue:
103. "The study of history has value only to the extent that it is relevant to our daily lives."

144. "It is the artist, not the critic,* who gives society something of lasting value."
 *a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings, etc.

Argument 1
Maybe I am so lucky that this argument is my first one.

2006年08月10日

Issue 137: "There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer’s expectations or desires."

Different people have different opinions when they observe the same object. Even one person has a different view of the same thing at different time and place. It seems that there’s no such thing as purely objective observation because everybody takes his or her own subjective mood into the object. However, it should be admitted that there’s something observed absolutely objective.

Generally speaking, everybody has his or her own opinion at the sight of the same object. Guided by their interest or feeling, the observers share no same idea especially on something abstract. A simple example exists here that when the value of society is argued, people who are emotional or who has heightened aesthetic sensibilities will probably take the impression that it is art that reflects the value of the society, while other people who are analytical or cognitive would prefer science as the determinant factor. Furthermore, observers are also guided by their expectations or desires. One who is hungry is likely to imagine the cloud as hamburgers while one who wants a car very much will think of it as a perfect car when he or she sees the same cloud. Actually, these sorts of subjective observations are subjective interpretation.

However, there’s something observed purely objective which is called the truth. As a rule, scientific discoveries and knowledge are always on behalf of these objective observations. No one will deny that these discoveries and knowledge are experimented and tested for a long time until they are proved correct and accepted not only the field of science but also by the public. The future technology may take these truth into the realm of false, but for the moment, these objective observation are shared the same opinions by the public.

Besides, observation can be objective. According to psychological discipline, given the same spatial, perspective, sensory acuity and awareness, just as the video camera does, observations would all be essentially in accord. These kinds of observations can not be rejected even if they are provided as the evidence to the court and usually they are crucial to the trials. People may have different opinions about the inner activity in the mind of the person appears in the video, however, no one would pull down the fact about what he or she was doing when he or she was aimed at by the camera.

In sum, though people have different perspectives on the same object according to their feeling, situation, or desire, they can not refuse those objective observations such as scientific discoveries and knowledge mentioned above. Furthermore, observations can be objective by various method provided by the booming new technology.

Argument 97: The following appeared in a memo from the manager of television station KICK. "A nationwide survey reveals that a sizeable majority of men would like to see additional sports programs on television. After television station WACK increased its sports broadcasts,

its share of the television audience in its viewing area almost doubled. To gain a larger audience

share in our area, and thus increase company profits, KICK should also revise its broadcast

 schedule to include more sports coverage." 

In this memo, the manager recommends that television station KICK should revise its broadcast schedule to include more sports coverage. To bolster this recommendation, the manager points out one nationwide survey reveals a sizeable majority of men would like to see additional sports programs. Moreover, the manager points out television station WACK almost doubled its share of the television audience in its viewing area by increasing its sports broadcasts. However, the recommendation relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, no evidence provided to prove the statistical reliability of the nationwide survey. The mentioned word “sizeable” is an abstract item that no accurate number can be calculated according to this word. Besides, even if the survey covers a lot of people, it is insufficient to see the coverage of the mass. No conclusion can be drawn that this survey could cover the all kinds of people with different tastes and feelings.

Even if the manager can provide other proof to confirm the nationwide survey is statistically reliable, this survey may not necessarily apply to the viewing area KICK occupies. It is possible that just a small amount of men in this area like sports while the majority prefer other programs. Besides, even though they like sports, conclusion can not be reached that they will spend more time on the additional sports programs on the television.

Furthermore, lacking of the reason why the audience in WACK’s viewing area doubled, the manager can not make his commendation convinced. Potentially, the increase of audience was due to another popular program which attracts many people showed at the same, so the assumption that it is the increase of sports program that increase the share of audience is incomplete to be conclusive.

Even if WACK’s double increase of its audience is owing to the sports program, no sufficient evidence is provided to prove WACK’s success necessarily apply to KICK. Possibility exists that the main force of the audience in the area of KICK may be women who like entertainment program instead of sports. As a result, the increase in sports program may decrease the share of audience in this area and it surly operates counterproductively.

Finally, the manager makes a hasty generalization that the recommendation will increase the profit. Lacking of the tax, revenue, and any other possible cost, no one can confirm the increase of the profit even if the share of the audience doubles. What’s worse, KICK may sustain a loss in business.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the manager must show — perhaps by way of a reliable citywide study — that the number of men who like sports program and who will spend time on the additional sports program. Besides, the manager has to provide the reasons why WACK doubles its share of audience. Moreover, the main force of the audience in the viewing area of KICK should be identified to determine the feasibility of the increase of sports program. Last but not least, evidence that confirm the increase of profit should not be missed.

 

2006年08月08日

Argument 23: A recent sales study indicated that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants that specialize in seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about eating healthily. Therefore, a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable.

In this argument, the arguer draw a conclusion that a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable. To bolster the conclusion, the arguer points out that the consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurant has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Moreover, the arguer points out the majority of families in this city are two-income families who eat fewer home-cooked meals and concern more about eating healthily according to a nationwide study. However, the conclusion relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

Firstly, the arguer provides no evidence to prove the recent sales study is statistically reliable. It is wondered how many restaurants have been studied and it is questionable whether they represent the situation of the entire Bay City. Furthermore, the statistics of 30 percent increasing is not sufficient to reach the conclusion that people in the city are more and more inclined to eat seafood dishes. Possibility exists that the basic number of 30 percent is so small that it doesn’t do any significant difference.

Secondly, the nationwide study showing clear trends among two-income families toward dining

out and eating healthily does not necessarily apply to Bay City. Though the majority of families in this city are two-income families, they do not follow what the nationwide study present. What’s more, it is said that this study does a research into a 10 years phenomenon, the reliability is suspected without any evidence for the arguer to provide.

Thirdly, even if the most families follow the nationwide study, the arguer shows us scant evidence to prove the families in Bay City go out to eat seafood. Assumed that they may concern more and more about eating healthily, there are many foods to choose in the city instead of seafood. It is possible that the native families dislike seafood while the increasing of consumption is due to those tourists. Besides, the families may take the price into their thoughtful consideration.

Finally, the arguer hastily generalize that the restaurant in seafood will be quite popular and profitable even if all what the arguer provides above are creditable. Lacking of the data of the market and the government act, no one can confirm this restaurant will be popular and profitable. People will probably not present the restaurant just owing to its high price. Even if many people will come and consume much, the arguer offers nothing about the tax and other costs which are determinant to the profit. Potentially, the restaurant will make a little profit, even sustains a loss in business.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the argument’s author must show–perhaps by way of a reliable citywide study–that the demand among restaurant patrons for seafood is sufficient to support a new seafood restaurant, and that a sufficient number of people who order fish at Bay City restaurants will be able and willing to at least try the new restaurant. The author would also bolster the argument by providing reliable evidence that Bay City reflects the nationwide trends cited, and that these trends will continue in the foreseeable future in Bay City. Finally, to better assess the argument I would need detailed cost and revenue estimates for a new Bay City seafood restaurant–to determine the likelihood that even a popular such restaurant would turn a profit.

 

Issue 88: In many countries it is now possible to turn on the television and view government at work. Watching these proceedings can help people understand the issues that affect their lives. The more kinds of government proceedings—trials, debates, meetings, etc—that are televised, the more society will benefit

A new era of democratic politics is on its way, due to the televising on those kinds of government proceeding, such as trials, debates, meetings, etc. In many countries, watching these proceeding do help people understand the issues that affect their lives, while sometimes, the justice is doubtful under this televising.

Generally speaking, this kind of watching make the so-called black politics much more clear and open. Common people, interested or not interested in politics, have the chances to know what is happening in their government and how the acts that affect their lives are brought into effect. With the help of television, they can see clearly how the court processes the cases and what is going on in White House especially some great affairs are taking place. As a result, officials, clear or unclear, have to act well in daily work. They are working under the watching of hundreds of thousands of eyes and their words and behaviors are no longer the secrets in the small office. In addition, this watching, inevitably, provides insight into how a government actually works.

However, some cases under this watching operates in an opposite function. The judge in a court had to confess that watching on him more or less affected the justice of the trial. No matter how calm he tried to keep, he was surely affected by the camera that was aiming at him which leaded to such a result that he had to perform well in the eye of public in which his judgment became somewhat inequitable. Furthermore, here comes to another problem that is when these proceedings are televised, some ignominious events may be reported which are obviously relate to the reputation of the government. This is the worst thing the government want to face and this is why officials complains a lot about that watching is excessive and broad in every aspect of their work.

Admittedly, no matter how broad and deep the televisions have an insight into those proceedings, there is always blind point. Something unbeknown is still moving and unveiled. Much of what happens in government takes place "behind the scenes", not necessarily in full view of the cameras in the meeting place. While to an extent "seeing is believing", quite often it is what you don’t see that makes the difference. Merely televising governmental proceedings certainly enhances understanding, but to fully understand the process a person would actually have to actively participate in that process. However, this kind of hiding is often called “to protect government” which is said to be reluctant for the officials especially when it comes to the question of national security.

In sum, those government proceedings make a country’s government more transparent, at least in democratic countries and society can certainly benefit from the television coverage of certain governmental proceedings. To actually see the elected officials in action can bring an extra element of understanding into the inner workings of a government. Politicians can be held accountable for their actions while they are being "watched" by the television cameras. No longer can they hide in anonymity while they are conducting the business of the people. However, not all governmental proceedings should be televised. There are times when secrecy is an absolute requirement for making sure that the correct decisions are made.

 

Issue 48: People make the mistake of treating experts with suspicion and mistrust, no matter how valuable their contributions might be.

Experts, who are also common persons, should be objectively valued, no matter how significantly their words and behaviors affect their field. However, they are always treated emotionally by people who trust them or distrust them. Some experts are regarded as the God while others’ valuable discoveries are discarded unmercifully.

Generally speaking, opinions of experts are trustworthy in their area especially when it comes to solve some problems which require special expertise. Admittedly, ordinary people have their own perspectives into the problems which are waiting to be settled, however, they often adopt what those experts tell them to do even if they have much confidence in themselves. That is why people come to doctors, who are expert at medicines, when they have just a trivial question about their health. And that is also why people come to engineers, who have the authority to explain the engineering phenomenon, when they get nothing reconciled after a quarrel about how the spacecraft returned from the outer space.

Furthermore, people usually take it for granted that what the experts say is always right. A person, who may be good at computer, like a graduate who major in computer science, usually comes to his or her tutor for help when he or she has trouble in some problem. At this time, it is quite possible that he or she will undoubtfully accept the “truth” that is instructed by his or her honorable tutor who may have high reputation in the domain of computer, even if the “truth” includes something ambiguous. A graduate is like this, let alone a common housewife stick to buy what those professors of human health recommend firmly and persistently.

However, experts are not equal to truth or perfectness. No one in the world is perfect, just as there is no perfect gold. Experts may make mistakes, incautiously or intentionally. Things are happening here and there that the view of an ordinary people proves to be right eventually after one or many experts sentence the possibility to death. Frankly, people who hold proficient skill settle down their work from a conventional start and in this case, they probably ignore those so-called dead angles which are randomly defined as impossibility. This may do a good explanation to the cases mentioned above. Another situation should be taken into account that some experts convey false information to public on purpose. Telling a white lie which can comfort the majority of people who worry about the occurring flu may be forgiven, while deliberate inclinations in order to make money in spite of the benefit of public are supposed to be extinguished once they emerge.

In sum, experts can not be judged as a God or a useless person. Only by taking those problems into thoughtful consideration after hearing the advise or suggestions the experts advocate can one make a good decision about what he or she want to do, even if he or she is merely to buy a bag of crisp chips.

2006年08月06日

Argumrnt 1: The following appeared in a memorandum written by the vice president of Nature’s Way, a chain of stores selling health food and other health-related products.

"Previous experience has shown that our stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives. We should therefore build our next new store in Plainsville, which has many such residents. Plainsville merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs. The local health club, which nearly closed five years ago due to lack of business, has more members than ever, and the weight training and aerobics classes are always full. We can even anticipate a new generation of customers: Plainsville’s schoolchildren are required to participate in a ‘fitness for life’ program, which emphasizes the benefits of regular exercise at an early age."

 

In this memo the vice president of Nature’s Way (NW), a chain of stores selling health food and health-related products, recommends opening a store in Plamesville. To bolster his recommendation the vice president cites the following facts about Plainesville: (1) sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs; (2) the local health club has more members than ever; (3) the city’s schoolchildren are required to participate in a fitness program. However, Close scrutiny of each of these facts, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

 

Firstly, there’s not a numerical statement to tell us how many running shoes and exercise clothing have been sold. It’s possible that the whole amount is very low though it’s at all-time high. Lacking of statistical data, I can not accept that those shoes and clothing are at a good sale. Even if they are sold well, we can not draw a conclusion that people in Plainsville like sports which is said to the sign of healthy lives. It’s quite possible that they buy those shoes and clothing just for leisure instead of sports. The reason why people want to buy them may be that those clothing and shoes are fit to wear and make people comfortable.

 

Secondly, by the same token, the vice president provides us scant data about the number of people who take part in the health club. Even if he mentions that the weight training and aerobics classes are always full, we can get a clear impression which can convince us people here conern healthy lives. We have to wonder how many healthy clubs there are, how many weight training and aerobics classes there are in the healthy club, and how the scale of the class is. It’s likely that only one class with 10 people in all can make his argument true.

 

Finally, there’s no evidence to show the relationship between “fitness for life ” for Plainsville’s schoolchildren and that vice president’s recommendation. Admittedly, schoolchildren are required to participate in this program, yet, there’s no evidence in the memo to reflect they will buy NW’s products. Maybe the children are only asked to take beneficial exercises instead of eating health food. Furthermore, children are instinctive rebels who may be strongly against these food for its taste or just the appearance. Besides, the vice president just take these schoolchildren as his future customers. However, what the company really want is immediate profit instead of 10 years’ or more waiting.

 

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation the vice president must provide dear evidence–perhaps by way of a local survey or study–that Plainsville residents who buy and wear exercise shoes and clothing, and especially the health club’s members, do in fact exercise regularly, and that these exercisers are likely to buy health foods and health related products at a NW store. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know why Plainesville’s health club is popular, and why  Plainesville does not contain more health clubs. I would also need to know what competition NW might face in Plainsville.

Issue20: Scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society. It is more important that they pursue their individual interests, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem.

 

There’s a growing public concern about whether scholars and researchers should pursue their individual interests or not. Must them concern only with their work which is said to make a contribution to the larger society? Don’t them have free time to do something which is in their interests, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem? I am one hundred percent behind the speaker, for reasons below.

 

Firstly, historically speaking, many beneficial contribution are owing to these simply pursuing individual interests. Edison, who invented thousands of new things which are beneficial or even crucial to our nowadays daily life, was just trying to accomplish what he really liked instead of intentionally making a contribution to the larger society. Not to mention other famous scientists in history, such as Newton, Galileo and so on, people in the present age recommend Stephen Hawking, who is on his way to unveil the mystery of the universe. He originate his discovery form individual interests instead of so-called contribution to the society.

 

Secondly, people may wonder who decide which makes a contribution to the larger society. The government, schools, or just a few experts? The answer is NONE. It’s people, who benefit from these new things, do the final decision. As a rule, these things, as long as they do good to people, are called contribution. Yet, nobody knows either a discovery by Hawking or preventing the extinction of a species will make larger contribution to the society. As a result, how can people require the preeminent astrophysicist stopping his continuous efforts which may decide the fate of human being? Who can confirm what the results impulsed by the unusual or idiosyncratic interests is going to be as time passes by?

 

Thirdly, scientists should enjoy freedom in pursuit of truth and individual interests. Nobody are willing to be controlled or commanded to complete the tasks they dislike, especially in name of social contribution. Academic atmosphere is full of freedom which encourage academic study to thrive to prosperity and It is right freedom which creats creativity which is essential to urge the world moving  on. Besides, scientists are those born full of imagination and instinctive longing for freedom who may not endure those shackle and choose to leave which is disastrous to the society.

 

Admittedly, Everything has its two sides. People have to watch closely to the interests, which may be intent to do something evil though the majority do good. Not only from the movies, but also from reality can people find what such a bad research into individual interests bring us. Even stopped ahead, the shadow in the heart of the public can not be removed easily, staying for long. Yet, another phenomenon should be pay attention to that some researchers and scholars indulge themselves in their obvious uesless interests. As for this seemingly personal diathesis, it is their college or research center who should take over.

 

In sum, I agree that reseaches and scholars should be given freedom and time to pursue their individual interests, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem. Engaging one’s interests hunting does not yield to social advance, instead, this can encourage reseachers and scholars, who play a main role in the society, to make a better world to live.

 

2006年08月05日

This is my first issue which is certainly not good. Some sentences are cited form the modal. Well, if anybody are willing to do me a favour to modify it, I appreciate it a lot.

Issue 1: Reform is seldom brought about by people who are concerned with their own reputation and social standing. Those who are really in earnest about reforming a government, an educational system, or any other institution must be willing to be viewed with disdain by the rest of the world.

Human beings are instinctively seeking approval and admiration from others, extrovert or introvert. No one in the world can deny the desire for the thunderous applause form thousands of supporters in the large square, even if he or she take it as his or her tag that “I am a hermit with nothing honorable”. As a result, everybody takes measures, usually different, to get their goal to win the applause which will to a great extent encourage his passion to achieve another goal. However, those devote themselves to the reforming of any institution, such as government, educational system and so forth, will destined to undergo doubts, disdains and scorns in the beginning, which is not the situation they are happy to see. Yet, their bear of these contempt will turn out to instigation which keeps driving themselves to achieve the reputation and honor.

There are no same leaves in the forest. People, even if they are twins born together, living together, fostered together by the same parents, are always different in many aspects such as religions, political view, level of education, which will determine their way to cognize and achieve the personal reputation which is usually bound with eagerness to involve a social affair such as reforming which is also the sign of one’s aggressive characteristic. One may act enthusiastically in the front of public to support the reforming while an indifferent one who are relatively interested in it will readily accept the government, educational system, or other institution of the time.

Here comes a problem that how a person sacrifice his personal reputation for the social affair in which he or she is earnest. In fact, seemingly like a paradox, this problem can be solved in further comprehension of reputation. It is success that brings reputation. In the way to obtain success, just conforming to the principles is merely enough, and what he or she has to do is to dominate the institution by creating the unique rules and principles. Admittedly, it will take a long way for him or her to accomplish his or her objective and this is not a plain way with claps and flowers. Scorns and rejects, which almost breaks him or her down, is potluck. Before any new idea to be accept, modification or subversion of the original fort to be implemented, the reformer will certainly suffer the distains. His or her aggression for success and profound understanding of this fact will stimulate him or her to persist and ingore those difficulties.

Admittedly, it is unfair to underestimate the role of common people play in the reforming. Though they can not be the leader, owing to various resaons such as lacking of charisma, discontiguous effort, or just short of interest, their contribution to the beneficial reforming can not be neglected. Their care of well-being encourage them to make efforts to their daily work and their indifference can make them rational in judging the insitution which are being reformed. The leaders can not bring their accomplishment to success without these fundamental work.

Finally, leaders’ aggessive efforts and followers’ reasonable cooperation work a reformed institution out. The reward, like reputation, status, to leaders and improved welfare which make common people satisfied will make the initial distain nothing.