Arg-53

The following appeared in a health magazine:

"The citizens of Forsythe have adopted more healthful lifestyles. Their responses to a recent survey show that in their eating habits they conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they did ten years ago. Furthermore, there has been a fourfold increase in sales of food products containing kiran, a substance that a scientific study has shown reduces cholesterol. This trend is also evident in reduced sales of sulia, a food that few of the most healthy citizens regularly eat."

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

————————————————————————————————————————

满分范文赏析

In this argument the speaker concludes that Forsythe citizens have adopted healthier lifestyles based their current eating habits and how closely conform to government nutritional recommendations. The speaker indicates that sales of kiran, a substance known to reduce cholesterol, have increased fourfold, while sales of sulia have been declining. This argument is unpersuasive for several reasons.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument开头段结构，即：C – E - F的开头结构，首句概括原文的C(Conclusion)。接下来的一句话概括了原文为了支持他的结论所引用的E(Evidence)。最后尾句中给出开头段到正文段的过渡句，指出原文在逻辑上存在F(Flaw)。

【此段功能】

本段作为Argument开头段，具体功能就在发起攻击。首先，概括原文的结论：Forsythe（简称F）地区的居民已经有了健康的生活习惯因为他们的饮食接近政府的nutritional recommendations。接下来分别列举了原文为了支持这个结论引用的证据：F地区kiran销量上升近四倍，而sulia的销量下降。论据的归纳用于铺垫出正文段的具体攻击。最后点出原文存在逻辑错误，引出后面的分析。

First, the survey must be proven a reliable source before being considered as evidence. Specifically, the responses must be accurate. Furthermore, the number of respondents must be statistically significant and representative of the overall Forsythe citizenry in terms of eating habits. Without evidence of the survey's reliability, it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions about the current dietary habits of Forsythe.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第一个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。

【此段功能】

本段作为正文第一段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：调查类错误。作者认为原文没有说明所引用调查的准确性。作者进一步提出，调查得到的回答必须是正确的，调查样本数量必须statistically significant and representative。在没有关于调查可靠性证据的情况下，通过调查得到的F地区饮食习惯的结果是不靠谱的。

Second, the argument relies on the dubious assumption that the government nutritional recommendations themselves are healthy. It is entirely possible that the dietary habits of Forsythe citizens were healthier ten years ago than they are now because they ran contrary to the current recommendations. Without substantiating the government recommendations, there is no way to determine if the citizens are actually healthier or simply in compliance with the government definition of healthy.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第二个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。

【此段功能】

本段作为正文第二段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：错误因果（论据模糊）。原文的结论建立在“政府nutritional recommendation是健康的”这一前提条件下，而作者认为这里是值得怀疑的。作者指出，F地区十年前的饮食可能比现在要更健康因为其与nutritional recommendation相差较多。在缺乏nutritional recommendation信息的前提下得到的结论是靠不住的。

Third, the speaker assumes too hastily that increasing sales of products with kiran indicates healthier eating habits. Perhaps Forsythe citizens are eating these foods in amounts or at intervals that compromise the health benefits thereof. Without ruling out this possibility the speaker cannot reasonably and confidently conclude that increased kiran consumption has resulted in improved health for Forsythe's citizens.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第三个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。

【此段功能】

本段作为正文第三段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：错误因果（论据模糊）。作者Kiran销量的增加不能说明F地居民饮食更加健康。作者提出其他可能性来反驳原文的观点，可能F地区在吃这些事物的量和频率上达不到健康的标准。

Fourth, the speaker assumes that few of Forsythe's healthiest citizens eat sulia regularly indicating that sulia is not healthy. It is possible that sulia has no effect on health, or that it actually promotes health. Lacking firm evidence that sulia affects health, adversely or otherwise, and that healthy people avoid sulia for this reason, the speaker cannot justify any conclusions about the health of Forsythe's citizens.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第四个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。

【此段功能】

本段作为正文第四段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：错误因果。作者认为，F地区最健康的人很少吃sulia并不能说明sulia不健康。进一步，作者给出了关于sulia的其他可能性，可能sulia对健康没有任何效果，或者sulia是对健康有益的。

Finally, even if Forsythe citizens have been making healthy changes, they could just as easily have been adopting other habits that offset these healthy changes. Unless all other habits affecting health have remained unchanged, the speaker cannot justifiably conclude that the overall lifestyle of Forsythe's citizenry has become healthier.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即：概括第五个逻辑错误的错误类型和原文犯错位置，接下来给出合理的理由和他因来反驳原文。

【此段功能】

本段作为正文第五段，攻击文章犯的主要逻辑错误：因果类错误（忽略他因）。作者认为，即使F地居民健康状况改变，但有其他habits会offset health change。作者提出，必须在other habits不变的情况下，才能得到F地居民healthier的结论。

In sum, the argument fails to persuade. To strengthen it the speaker must demonstrate that the survey accurately reflects the dietary habits of Forsythe's citizens, and that by following the government's nutritional recommendations more closely these citizens are in fact healthier. The speaker must also show that Forsythe's citizens have not made other dietary or other lifestyle changes that offset healthful changes. Finally, to better assess the argument an audience would need to be provided with more information about the manner and extent to which Forsythe's citizens now consume kiran, and about the healthfulness of sulia.

【此段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument结尾段结构，即：C – S的结尾结构，首先再次重申原文的站不住脚的Conclusion，接下来给出给合理建议Suggestion。

【此段功能】

本段作为Argument结尾段，具体功能就总结归纳+建议措施，首先再次重申：原文“住在小城镇会提高健康水平和寿命”这一论断是没有说服力的。接下来作者给出几条建议：作者需要在health example和cause of health example之间建立逻辑联系，就是要提出影响居民健康的具体因素。这几条建议含蓄的隐射前面的错误，前后呼应，文章有力结尾，浑然一体。

——————————————————————————————————————————

满分要素剖析

一、语言方面

1. First, the survey must be proven a reliable source before being considered as evidence. Specifically, the responses must be accurate. Furthermore, the number of respondents must be statistically significant and representative ... . Without evidence of the survey's reliability, it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions about... .

标志性的调查类错误分析模板。提出调查必须满足（1）参与者的回答准确反映了他们的习惯（2）样本的数量和质量必须足以反映整体的情况

2. Finally, even if Forsythe citizens have been making healthy changes, they could just as easily have been adopting other habits that offset these healthy changes. Unless all other habits affecting health have remained unchanged, the speaker cannot justifiably conclude that the overall lifestyle of Forsythe's citizenry has become healthier.

标志性的GRE argument因果类错误分析，提出作者忽略的其他原因来反驳原文中的论断

3. In sum, the argument fails to persuade. （标志性的GRE argument结尾段首句，再次重申原文中的conclusion存在逻辑错误）To strengthen it the speaker must demonstrate that... . The speaker must also show that ... . Finally, to better assess the argument an audience would need to be ... , and about... .(针对上面分析的逻辑错误，给出使文章更有说服力的合理化建议）

二、逻辑结构

本文内容清晰，逻辑严谨，采用了开头段——正文段1——正文段2——正文段3——正文段4——正文段5——结尾段的六段论结构，文章长短适中，层次一目了然。开头段按照C-E-F的逻辑结构，顺利引出后文的分析。论证段中，从提出错误，到分析错误，到给出可能性，最后总结错误，层次清晰，衔接自然。结尾段总结全文，重申错误，给出合理化建议。这样一篇文章从开头到结尾逻辑严谨，内容清晰，圆满的完成了论证的作用。

第五个论证段的开头写的很出彩：

Finally, even if Forsythe citizens have been making healthy changes, they could just as easily have been adopting other habits that offset these healthy changes.

此句中，even if引导让步状语从句。即先承认原文前面的逻辑错误是正确的，在这一前提下指出原文中仍然存在逻辑错误。这种写法使得argument各段落之间联系紧密，层次分明。