gre写作金作文背诵aa模板-olivia

1、Merelybasedonunfoundedamptionandsuspiciousevidence,themendation endorsed the arguer gives reasonhis argument ist . To bolster this,t. In addition, he indicatest. Furthermore,he cites the result of a recent survey in support of thismendation. While theauthors argumens some merits, it is flawed on N c

2、ounts.To sum up, this arguer fails to substantiate hit, because theevidencitedheysis does not lend strong credibility to what the arguermaains. To better assess the argument as it stands, the arguer would have toprovide affirmative evidence with regard to. Additionally, he would have todemonstratet.

3、 Therefore, only with the given factors discussed aboveincluded could this argumente more thorough and logically acceptable.第一宗罪：无因果联系The author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. A chronologicalrelationship is only one of the indicators of a causal relationship betn two causal siblele,

4、events. However, while. it does not nesarily establish a generalrelationship betn these events. To establish this relationship, othercausal explanations relevant to.must be considered and ruled out. For experhaps C is the cause of these events or perhaps B is caused by D. Since the authorfails to ad

5、dress these factors, themendation calling for. can be dismissedout of hand (adv. 无法控制, 脱手, 告终, 立即) as frivolous.第二宗罪 Insufficient-sleThe evidence the author provides is insufficient to support thedrawn sarily a good ive of all A. Itfrom it. The sistics from only a few recent years are not neindicato

6、r of future trends, unless it can be shownt A1 is represenissiblet. In fact, in face of such limited evidence, it is presumptuous toconcludet .第三宗罪: 错误类比 (based on a falseogy )it is highly doubtfult the facts drawn fromare applicable to. Differenbetn the twoclearly outweigh the similarities, thus nu

7、llifying this result. It isentirely importantsiblet A 与 B 存在很大的不同. In short, without accounting forsible dissimilarity betn A and B, the arguer cannot reasonablyamet what is true of. will likewise be true of .第四宗罪 all things are equalThe author commits the fallacy of “all things are equal”. The fact

8、two years ago is not a sound evidence to draw appenedThe authort.ames without justificationt the background conditions have remained thesame at different times or at different locations. The amption is unwarrantedbecause things may fluctuate grey over extended periods of time. There are likelyall ki

9、nds of difference betn A and B. For exle, A; however, B.Any of these scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the claimt 第五宗罪 Either-Or choiceThe author unfairly amest AA and BB are mutually exclusive alternatives and n the two extremes. However, the argument failsleaves no middle ground betto r

10、ule outsibilityt adjusting A and B might produce better results.第六宗罪 survey is doubtfulThe pool cited by the author is too vague to be informative. The claim does not indicate who conducted the pool, who responded, or when, where and how the poll was conducted.For exle:The argumentls ust “many” . Ho

11、wever, the speaker fails toindicate the percentage of , so this evidence is far too vague to be meaningful.The author fails to provide information regarding the absolute number of.Therespondentsmustbesisticallysignificantinnumberandrepresenive of the overall.A threshold problem ist the editorial neg

12、lects to indicate how recentlyhe survey wa claims about a time to tually conducted. When s particular group, the s eralization. All we knowles are used to make general les should be close enough inhis editorial ist the surveywas recently published. The less recent the survey itself,the less reliable

13、the results to indicate currenterest levels.The firm does not provide persuasive evidence to confirm the reliability of the studies.While the phrase. may appear to lend credibility to these claims, the phrase is vague enough to actually render the claims worthless, he absence of any information abou

14、t them.It issiblet the claim is based on hearsay or on scant anecdotalevidence. these questionsUntilare answered, the results of the survey are worthless as.evidence for the第gratuitous amptionthe argument turns on the gratuitous amptiont. There is, however, noguaranteet this is the case. Nor does the author cite any data or projections tosupport this amption. Just as likely, Lacking this amption, the expecionof is entirely unfounded.Profit 问题The authorst is unwarranted. Profit is factor of not only revenue,but also costs. It is entirelysiblet the costs of