GRE作文范文 Argument-14

　　GRE作文范文 Argument-14 “The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority.” 嘉文博译Sample Essay “People should not be misled by the advertising competition between Coldex and Cold-Away, both popular over-the-counter cold medications that anyone can purchase without a doctor‘s preｓｃｒｉｐｔion. Each brand is accusing the other of causing some well-known, unwanted side effect: Coldex is known to contribute to existing high blood pressure and Cold-Away is known to cause drowsiness. But the choice should be clear for most health-conscious people: Cold-Away has been on the market for much longer and is used by more hospitals than is Coldex. Clearly, Cold-Away is more effective.” In this argument, the arguer concludes that Cold-Away is “clearly” a more effective over-the-counter cold medication. To support this conclusion, the arguer states that the brand Coldex is known to contribute to existing high blood pressure while Cold-Away is known to cause drowsiness. The arguer further states that Cold-Away is better for health-conscious people because it is used by more hospitals than the other brand and it has also been on the market for much longer. This argument suffers from several critical fallacies and is ultimately unconvincing. First of all, one wonders who the writer is of such a one-sided argument. The argument states that each brand has “accused” the other of causing well-known and undesirable side effects, then states that Coldex is known to contribute to existing high blood pressure while Cold-Away is known to cause drowsiness. Coldex does not cause high blood pressure, it is said to merely contribute to an existing medical condition. The wording of the argument could lead a casual reader into believing that Coldex causes high blood pressure, which is a much more serious side effect than drowsiness in most situations. This brings up the possibility that this particular argument was written by an employee or paid copywriter of the Cold-Away company. No evidence other than the statement of the author is given to support the allegations of side effects, which further weakens the argument. Secondly, the arguer states that for most health-conscious people, it should be a clear choice in choosing Cold-Away because it has been on the market much longer and is used by more hospitals than Coldex. First of all, simply being on the market longer in and of itself is not indicative of what medication a health-conscious person should choose. Indeed, many drugs that are new to the market have been developed with fewer and less serious side effects yet with greater efficacy of treatment. Secondly, there are a multitude of reasons that more hospitals might use one medication rather than another. It may be less expensive, which is important to the evermore cost-conscious hospital industry. The Cold-Away company may provide far and away more free samples, so that it costs the hospital nothing to dispense to patients, thereby increasing its use. Or perhaps the Cold-Away company simply has better marketing, thus giving the perception that it is better for health conscious people; therefore more hospitals use it. By neglecting to address these possibilities, the argument fails to convince that Cold-Away is clearly better for health-conscious people. Furthermore, the arguer concludes: “Clearly, Cold-Away is more effective.” There is absolutely no evidence of any kind presented in the argument that addresses the idea of which cold medication is more effective. Side effects are discussed, and (specious) reasons are given why Cold-Away should be chosen by health conscious people. However, even assuming that all statements in the argument are true, there is nothing in the argument that discusses whether Coldex or Cold-Away is more effective. Again, length of time on the market is not an indicator of effectiveness, indeed it is extremely likely that a more recent market entry would be more effective (in this case Coldex) due to developments in medical technology. Similarly, if more hospitals are using Cold-Away than Coldex, there are factors other than effectiveness that could be the cause. To summarize, a careful reading of the argument shows that there is no solid evidence presented to warrant the conclusions that Cold-Away is better for health-conscious people or that it is more effective than Coldex. This “argument” reads more like advertising copy written by the Cold-Away company marketing department. (605 words)

　　参考译文

　　下述文字摘自某份地方报纸。

　　民众不应该被Coldex和Cold-Away这两种药品之间的广告竞赛所误导，这两者均是任何人可在任何商店不需要大夫处方便可直接购买的、时下甚为流行的感冒药。每一种药都指责对方会引起某些众所周知的、令人生厌的副作用：Coldex会使既有的高血压症每况愈下，而Cold-Away则会引起嗜睡症。但是，对于大多数健康意识强烈的人们来说，他们所应作出的选择将是不言而喻的：Cold-Away药进入市场的时间比Coldex远长得多，且在更多的医院推广使用。显而易见，Cold-Away药具有更好的疗效。

　　在上述论述中，论述者的结论是，Cold-Away药“显然”是一种更为有效的、不需要大夫的处方便可直接购买的感冒药。为了支持这一结论，该论述者陈述道，Coldex品牌的同类药物会使既有的高血压症每况愈下，而Cold-Away只是引起嗜睡症而已。该论述者进一步陈述道，Cold-Away药更宜于健康意识强的人们，因为它比另一种品牌的药被更多的医院所使用，并且它上市供应的时间要长得多。该项论述含有某些关键性的逻辑谬误，因而无法令人信服。

　　首先，我们疑惑的是，持如此片面论点的一位作者竟是何许人也！该段论述宣称，每一品牌的药品均“指责”对方会引起众所周知的和令人生厌的副作用，接着陈述说，Coldex会使既有的高血压症每况愈下，而Cold-Away药只会引起嗜睡症状。Coldex不会导致高血压症，而是被说成仅仅是在使某种既有的医疗状况每况愈下。该论述的措辞很有可能会导致一位心不在焉的读者相信，Coldex实际上会导致高血压症，而在绝大多数情况下，这与嗜睡症状相比实乃一种严重得多的副作用。这就引出了这样一种可能性，即本篇论述可能是出自一位Cold-Away制药公司的职员，或是出自一位被Cold-Away制药公司收买的广告文字撰稿人。

　　其次，论述者陈述道，对于大多数具有极强健康意识的人们来说，选择Cold-Away药不啻是一种“不言而喻”的抉择，因为它上市销售的时间要比Coldex远长得多，并被更多的医院所使用。首先，上市销售的时间更长这一事实就其本身而言并不能表明它必然就是有着较强健康意识的人们所应选择的一种药物。实际的情况是，新上市销售的许多药品，在其研发过程中，其副作用被处理成比另一种药更少，更轻微，但疗效更好。第二，一种药被更多的医院所使用，这可以有无数的原因。它可能是因为较为廉价，这一点对于永远具有强烈成本意识的医疗行业来说殊为重要。Cold-Away公司可能提供了远来得多的免费试用品，因此各大医院可以在不支付任何成本的情况下让病人服用这些药品，从而扩大该药的使用范围。再者，Cold-Away公司可能拥有更好的销售体系，因此仿佛给人一种感觉，好像它的药品更宜于有较强健康意识的人们，故而有较多的公司在使用该药。由于没能探究这些可能性，该论述便无从让我们相信，Cold-Away的药品显然更宜于有着较强健康意识的人们。

　　此外，该论述者还得出结论说，“显而易见，Cold-Away药具有更好疗效。”但原文中绝对没有列举出任何证据来探讨这样一个问题，即哪一种感冒药疗效更好。确实，该论述者讨论了这两种药品的副作用，并给出了一些（似是而非的）理由来说明Cold-Away药应成为有健康意识的人们的共同选择。但是，即使我们假设原文中的所有论点均真实无疑，该论述也根本没有讨论Coldex与Cold-Away两种药之间何者更为有效。必须再度强调的是，上市销售的时间长短并不能等同于一种药物的有效程度。实际上，极有可能的是，一种药越是新近进入市场，由于其研发技术的提高，其疗效可能会更好（在此情形中，疗效更好的药应属于Coldex）。同样地，如果说Cold-Away药真的比Coldex药被更多的医院采用的话，个中的原因应是疗效之外的其他因素。

　　总而言之，对原文论点细加体会，便可揭示出，原文作者没有拿出确凿的证据来论证这样的一些结论，即Cold-Away药品更适用于有着较强健康意识的人们，以及其疗效优于Coldex药品。这一“论述”读上去更像是Cold-Away公司的销售部门炮制的一种广告册。