新gre红宝书：Issue写作范文详细解析(4)

发布时间：2012-01-20来源：查字典留学网

新gre红宝书：Issue写作范文详细解析(4)

GRE考试形式：中国大陆地区、香港、澳门、韩国目前执行分开考试的形式。由机考（分析性写作）和笔试（语文、数学）组成。

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) 感谢您阅读《Issue写作范文详细解析(4) 》一文，查字典出国留学网()编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。GRE考试形式：中国大陆地区、香港、澳门、韩国目前执行分开考试的形式。由机考（分析性写作）和笔试（语文、数学）组成。

[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。

感谢您阅读《Issue写作范文详细解析(4) 》一文，查字典出国留学网()编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。

原文来源： 点击查看更多与《新gre红宝书：Issue写作范文详细解析(4)》相关的文章>> 2012-05-11· GRE作文范文：历年GRE考试Issue主题范文及评析35 2012-05-11· gre作文模板：历年GRE考试Issue主题范文及评析20 2012-04-21· 2012gre写作例子：ÀúÄêGRE¿¼ÊÔIssueÌâ¿â·ÖÎöÓëÌá¸ÙÈýÊ®¾Å 2012-04-21· GRE写作备考：历年GRE考试Issue题库分析与提纲四十八 2012-04-21· gre范文：历年GRE考试Issue题库分析与提纲五十九 2012-04-21· GRE写作备考2012：历年GRE考试Issue题库分析与提纲六十六 2012-04-21· gre作文模板：2012新GRE考试写作常用句 2012-04-21· gre作文大讲堂：历年GRE考试Issue题库分析与提纲二十八 2012-04-21· GRE备考：ÀúÄêGRE¿¼ÊÔIssueÌâ¿â·ÖÎöÓëÌá¸ÙËÄÊ® 2012-04-21· gre写作模板：ÀúÄêGRE¿¼ÊÔIssueÌâ¿â·ÖÎöÓëÌá¸ÙËÄÊ®ËÄ