GRE作文范文 Issue-10

"Humanity has made little real progress over the past century or so. Technological innovations have taken place, but the overall condition of humanity is no better. War, violence and poverty are still with us. Technology cannot change the condition of humanity."

嘉文博译Sample Essay

The discussion of this statement turns on what is meant by "little real progress" from the first sentence, "the overall condition of humanity" in the second sentence, and "the condition of humanity" from the third sentence. To be sure, war, violence and poverty are still with us and we as mankind are probably more aware of these problems worldwide than ever before thanks to advances in technology and communication. But depending upon the definition of progress and the condition of humanity, this would appear to be an incorrect statement.
First of all, the phrase "little real progress" from the first sentence must be defined. If the author defines progress as elimination of death, war, violence and poverty, then perhaps it could be stated that humankind has not made much improvement over the past one hundred years. People are still dying, wars are still being fought, violence is present almost everywhere and there are most likely people in every country in the world living in poverty. However, if the term "progress" is defined not as elimination of these problems but rather a reduction in them, then great progress has been made over the past century. Life expectancies are up in nearly every country of the world due to improvements in medicine and the scientific study of the human body. War and violence, although still present, has been reduced and to a large part confined to certain areas of the world rather than the global wars of the past such was World Wars I and II. Poverty has also been reduced as international trade has lead to economic improvements in many formerly impoverished nations. Very real progress has been made in these areas over the past one hundred years.

Secondly, the phrases "the overall condition of humanity" and "the condition of humanity" must be defined. If the terms mean that we are all still born into pain, suffer many tragedies during our lives, and still die in the end, then of course the overall condition of humanity is no better than it was one hundred or even one hundred thousand years ago. Life is still life, and no matter what technological innovations come along, it is unlikely that the basic facts of living as a member of the human race will ever change. However, if the term means how we are able to live our lives during the time that we are given, then again tremendous progress has been made during the past century. Cures have been found for many diseases, some of which have officially been completely eliminated. Medical treatments for other diseases have made them less deadly or less debilitating. For example, many cancer victims that would have died in the past can now go on living comfortably and cancer-free after treatment. Diabetics who would have died in the past can now live nearly normal lives. Even poor eyesight can be effectively eliminated through laser surgery. It would seem to be beyond argument that overall, the condition of humanity is much better now than it was one century ago.

If one takes a very narrow definition of "progress" and "the condition of humanity", it could be fairly stated that mankind has made little in the way of advancement over the past century. Millions of people worldwide still live in poverty. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is killing millions of people with no cure in sight. War and violence continues in the Middle East, Africa and Afghanistan. But to take this narrow point of view would be to ignore the obvious tremendous advances that have been made over the past one hundred years by the human race. As mankind continues on into the twenty-first century, it would be preferable to consider all that has been accomplished over the past one hundred years and to look ahead to future advances over the next century instead of ignoring mankind's obviously improved circumstances today.

参考译文

在过去约一个世纪的时间中，人类几乎没有实现真正的进步。技术创新确实发生了，但人类的总体状况毫无改观。战争、暴力，以及贫穷仍然伴随着我们。技术无法改善人类的生存状况

　　上述陈述中的探讨所围绕的是这样三个概念的含义，即第一句中的"little real progress"，第二句中的"the overall condition of humanity"，以及第三句中的"the condition of humanity"。毫无疑问，战争、暴力以及贫穷仍然伴随着我们，并且，作为人类，由于技术与通信的进步，我们可能比以往任何时候都更深切地意识到了这些问题。但除非将"progress"和"the condition of humanity"这样的概念进行清晰界定，否则，上述陈述将是相当谬误的。

　　首先，第一句中的"little real progress"必须予以界定。如果作者将"progress"定义为祓除死亡、战争、暴力以及贫穷，那么或许可以这样说，人类在过去的100多年中并未取得太大的进展。人们仍在不断死亡，战争仍在进行，暴力几乎到处存在，世界每个国家都有人生活于贫困之中。但是，如果"progress"这一术语并非被定义为对上述问题的消除，而是对这些问题的削减，那么，过去一个世纪中人类确实取得了重大进步。由于医学和对人体科学研究水平的提高，全世界几乎每个国家中人类寿命都呈上升趋势。战争与暴力，虽然仍然存在，却已被减少，且在很大程度上都被限制在世界的某些地区，而再也不是像第一、第二次世界大战那样波及全球。随着国际贸易在许多以前的贫穷国家导致了经济改善，贫困也得以减轻。在过去的100年中，这些领域中已取得了极为真实的进步。其次，"the overall condition of humanity"以及"the condition of humanity"必须予以界定。如果这些术语指的是我们所有人仍然降生于痛苦之中，一生中蒙受着许多悲剧，并最终仍然死去，那么，毫无疑问，人类的总体状况丝毫不比100年或甚至10万年之前来得更好。生活依然是生活，无论产生怎样的技术创新，作为人类的一员，生活的某些基本事实依旧不变。如果该术语指的是我们是如何在被赋予的生存时间中得以生活的，那么我们可以再一次说，人类在过去的世纪中取得了巨大的进步。对许多疾病，人类已找到了治愈方法，某些疾病已正式被彻底消除。对某些疾病的医治已使这些病症变得不再那么致命，不再那么毁灭性。例如，在过去有可能死去的许多癌症患者，现在经治疗之后可继续舒服地生活下去，摆脱癌症的折磨。在过去可能会死去的糖尿病患者，现在也能过上几乎正常的生活。即使视力障碍也能通过激光手术被有效去除。总体而言，人类状况现在远好于一个多世纪之前，这似乎应是不争的事实。 如果从狭义上去理解"progress"和"the condition of humanity"，则人们可以甚为合理地说，人类在过去的一个多世纪中几乎没有取得任何进步。全球数以百万计的人仍生活在贫困之中，爱滋病正在夺走无数人的生命，而治愈方法遥遥无期。战争与暴力在中东,非洲以及阿富汗持续不断。然则，持此狭隘的观点则有可能使人无视人类在过去一百年中业已取得的昭然若揭的巨大进步。随着人类继续迈进21世纪，较为可取的做法应该是，我们应充分意识到在过去100年中人类业已取得的全部成就，并展望人类在下一个世纪中所可能取得的未来进步，而不是对人类今日显著改善的生存状况视而不见，置若罔闻。

 

GRE作文范文 Argument-10

"A recent study shows that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia. Interestingly, Asians, on average, eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. It turns out that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which have been found to possess disease-preventing properties. Thus, North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression."

嘉文博译Sample Essay

In this argument, the arguer cites a study showing that North Americans suffer from an amazingly higher rate of chronic fatigue and chronic depression than people living in Asia. From an unknown source, the arguer states that Asians eat much more soy than North Americans, who eat almost none, and that soy contains disease-preventing properties. The arguer then concludes his or her argument by stating that North Americans should consider regularly eating soy as a means of battling fatigue and depression. This argument suffers from at least four critical fallacies.

For the sake of this argument, we will assume that the studies and the statistics about North Americans' and Asians' soy eating habits are correct, and that isoflavones have been found to have disease-fighting properties. Given that, there is still a problem with the arguer directly correlating the eating of soy with the prevention of disease and depression. First of all, simply because soy may have disease-preventing properties, that does not mean that it can therefore fight chronic fatigue and chronic depression. Fatigue and depression may not actually even be considered as "diseases", therefore even given the fact that soy has disease-fighting properties, it would have no effect on the "nondiseases" of fatigue and depression. Secondly, even assuming that fatigue and depression are diseases, they are not specifically mentioned as diseases that soy or isoflavones are able to prevent. Perhaps soy can help prevent osteoporosis (bone loss), mumps or even chicken pox, but that does not mean that it can specifically address the problems of chronic fatigue and chronic depression. These two critical weaknesses alone make the argument unconvincing.

Furthermore, the arguer's conclusion is based on the idea that diet alone can prevent fatigue and depression by comparing the diets of North Americans and Asians. It is highly unlikely that diet alone is responsible for the tremendous difference in the rates of fatigue and depression between the two populations. Other factors such as lifestyles, occupations, residence in city or rural areas and levels of stress may play a much bigger factor than diet. Additionally, the arguer states that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which supposedly have disease-preventing properties. What is not stated, however, is whether these isoflavones are contained in a form in soy that is usable by the human body. It is possible that the particular configuration of the phytochemicals found in soy products is not usable by the human body, thereby producing no beneficial effects by people eating more soy products. In and of themselves, isoflavones may prevent certain diseases, but perhaps those found in soy are of no benefit to humans. By failing to address these possibilities, the arguer has presented an unconvincing argument.

In summary, the argument fails due to four major flaws in logic. First, "disease-preventing" properties does not mean "fatigue and depression" preventing properties. Secondly, fatigue and depression may not even be considered as diseases. Thirdly, the arguer ignores the probability that diet alone is not the sole reason behind the increased rates of fatigue and depression for North Americans as opposed to Asians. Finally, isoflavones as found in soy may not produce the same beneficial effects as when it is found in other forms. To strengthen the argument and conclusion, the arguer should present evidence that directly links diet to fatigue and depression as well as evidence that shows that soy can specifically prevent chronic fatigue and chronic depression in North Americans.

参考译文

　　一项最近的研究表明，居住在北美大陆上的人们要比居住在亚洲大陆上的人们患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例分别超出9倍和31倍。有意思的是，亚洲人平均每天只吃20克的大豆，而北美洲人却几乎一点都不吃。研究表明，大豆含有被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，这些植物化学物经科学家研究，发现拥有防病特性。因此，北美洲人应该考虑经常性地吃大豆，以此作为一种防止疲劳和压抑的方法。

　　在本段论述中，论述者援引了一项研究来证明，北美洲人患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例要比居住在亚洲的人令人惊讶地高。从一项来源不明的资料中，作者陈述道，亚洲人所吃的大豆要远多于北美人，而北美人则几乎一点都不吃，而大豆却含有防病的特性。论述者在其论述的结束处陈述首，北美人应考虑经常性地吃些大豆，以此作为一种抗疲劳和抗忧郁的方法。本段论述至少犯下了四个关键性的逻辑谬误。

　　 为了论述的缘故，我们假定关于北美人和亚洲人吃大豆的习惯这方面的研究和数据是完全正确的，并且异黄酮确实被科学家发现具有防病功效。即使在承认这些条件的情况下，论述者将食用大豆与防止疾病和抵抗忧郁直接联系起来，这一做法本身仍存在着问题。首先，即使大豆有可能具备防病特性，但这并非意味着它因此就能抵抗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。疲倦和忧郁实际上甚至还不可能被视作"疾病"，因此，尽管大豆具有防病作用属实，但它对于疲倦和忧郁这些"非疾病"可能毫无作用。其次，即使我们假定疲倦和忧郁可被视为疾病，但它们没有被具体提到是属于大豆或异黄酮所能预防的那类病症。或许，大豆可以预防骨质疏松症，流行性腮腺炎或甚至是水痘，但这并非意味着它能具体地治疗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症这样一些问题。这二个关键性的弱点本身就足以使得该论述缺乏可信度。

　 进而言之，论述者的结论所依据的是这样一个理念，即通过比较北美人和亚洲人的饮食，饮食本身可以来防止疲倦和忧郁。但很难想象饮食本身造成了两类人口之间患上疲倦和忧郁症比例方面的巨大差异。其他诸多因素，如生活方式，职业，居住在都市还是乡村，以及压力程度所产生的影响可能要比饮食大得多。此外，论述者陈述道，大豆含有一种可被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，据称具有防病功效。但论述者没有作出陈述，即这些异黄酮是否是以一种被人体使用的方式被包含在大豆中。有可能是，大豆产品中所发现的植物化学物，其特定的结构并不能为人体所利用，从而对食用较多大豆产品的人并不能产生任何益处。就其本身而言，异黄酮或许可能预防某些疾病，但大豆中所发现的异黄酮对人类毫无益处，这也是有可能的。由于没有探究这些可能性，论述者所摆出的这段论述便失去了说服力。

　　总的说来，本段论述因为四大逻辑缺陷而难以站得住脚。首先，"防病"特性并不能等同于"疲倦和忧郁症"预防特性。其次，疲倦和忧郁甚至还不能被视为疾病。第三，论述者忽视了这样一种可能性，即饮食本身并不是造成北美人相对于亚洲人疲倦与忧郁症比例上升的唯一原因。最后，大豆中所被发现的异黄酮可能并不能产生与在其他形式中所发现的异黄酮相同的益处。若要增强其论点和结论的力度，论述者应该拿出证据，将饮食与疲倦及忧郁直接联系起来，且提供证据来证明大豆能具体地防止北美人的慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。

嘉文博译郑重声明：