Yesterday‘s homework on arguement:
TOPIC: ARGUMENT133 - The following is a memo from the principal of Academia High School.
"Academia High School should abolish its after-school performing-arts programs and replace them with computer-technology programs. When nearby Techno High School did so last year, total enrollment in all of its after-school activities remained about the same. Moreover, on entering college, many Techno students chose a major directly related to their after-school activities. On the other hand, last year only 10 percent of Academia's graduating seniors chose performing arts as their major field of study in their first year of college, clearly indicating that most students do not have a strong interest in the performing arts."
WORDS: 405 TIME: 00:30:00 DATE: 2011-1-19 11:18:01
In this argument, the arguer conclude that Academia High School should not take performing-arts programs after school and replace them with computer-technology lessons. To support the conclusion, the arguer showed that most student did not chost arts as their major in college and Techno High School did so last year without enrollment dropping. This argument, although sounds reasonable, is suffered from several critical fallicies.
First of all, the evidence to prove students in Academia High school is not interesting in the performing arts is not sufficient. In the argument, we can only find few students choose to major in performing arts in the college. But interest does not mean career. College students choose their major not only because interest, but also other factors such as his or her ability will be influenced. While after-school class in high school is mostly attend by interest of the students. As we know, majoring performing arts will not easy to find a stable job. Maybe these student take performing-arts as a hobby after job. In the argument, we failed to find direct information about the situation of this programs in the argument, thus weaken the argument.
In addition, the aruger simply think all things are equal between Academia and Techno High School. These two shcools, although nearby, may be total different from each other. For instance, Techno High may take more attention to technology class while Academia, on the other hand, focus on arts. Therefore students in Techno High may be more interested in such class like Computer-technology but Academia not. Academia can open another class like piano classes after school.
Last but not least, even there are sufficient evidence to show Academia High stuents are also more interested in computer-technology, does Academia High have the ability to give the class? Those teacher taught performing-arts may not have any idea about computer at all. Therefore, if computer class have to be taughed, we have to hire another teacher. Which may cost a lot of money. Furthermore, how to deal with the old teacher taught performing-arts? All these things should be carefully considered.
To sum up, the argument is not well reasoned. To strengthen the argument, the arguer have to give more information about the students attitude about the old class in Academia High, the difference between the two schools and the ability for openning a computer for Academia. Otherwise, the arguer is simply begging the question throughout the argument.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yesterday's issue part, take me about 2 hours, my first issue essay, which is a quite easy topic...
issue 57:
"The depth of knowledge to be gained from books is much richer and broader than what can be learned from direct experience."
The speaker announced that books contain knowledge much more and wider than it come from experiences. While I agree that we can learn more quicker and systematic from books and the speaker's opinion is true in sometime. In my point of view, book knowledge, especially theory from books, need to be carefully considered before using it in practise.
Sometimes, the depth of knowledge from book is more deeper than from direct experience. Since these knowledge is come from many people's direct experience and rule out many error from people. Thus make book knowledge transcends the limitation of personnal experience. For example, physics is an subject based on experiment, but we can just learn it from books today since these books are concentrated many ancestors' experiment result, like Newton, Farad and Einstein. If we have to learn knowledge from direct experience, we have to redo these experiment again and waste a lot of time. Furthermore, we still need to be as wise as these great person to gather the right conclusion therefore we can get right knowledge. On the other hand, we may need only several minuates to learn the physical theorem from a book, which will save much time any money so we can learn more wider.
However, only read books in not enough. A person must use direct experience to help understanding the knowledge in the books to a part of his inner wisdom. Since most book knowledge is the conclusion from former experience, thus it is often describe in an abstract way. For instance, a book talking about computer programming always introduce a lot of concept such as variable, procedure and function before actual content begin, because one counld not understand what is talking about in the book without understanding these abstract concept. Furthermore, although good books always have many example to help the reader to understand the knowledge. People soon will find simply use theorem or method on book cannot solve many real problem. This is due to books are alway talking about general situtation and missing some details in order to reduce the length of the book and we can only learn them from practice. That is why we need experiment lesson about science like physics, chemistry and biology although we have already learn the theorem from books.
In addition, some knowledge cannot be written into words in books. This is more often occurred in literary and arts. Take painting as an example, students can learn how to deal with illumination and shadow by books but never know the way to illustrate their mind by painting or to the difference between different colors. Because these thing will include one's emotion and with creativity work. Furthermore, we can know the step of swimming in books. But we cannot learn the way to swim without actually swimming in water. Such knowledge about "how to do" can be only find throught practice.
Thirdly, as an old Chinese saying said (and I parapharsed) that No books is better than trust book abosulately, we always find error in books. Because books are written by persons. No matter how wise he or she is, the writer will limited in his or her sight. For instance, Classical physics has fail to describe the property of the light and regard it as a group of "points". While people later proved that light actually have some attribute of "wave". Such examples also shown in many part of our life.
To sum up, while book knowledge is quicker to learn, direct experience from practise should be wider and deeper. Also as Sir Francis Bacon has said, "Some books to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chew and digested", we should choose right book when we faced some problem in the real environment.
xish 最后编辑于 2011-01-20 17:23:48
大家好久不见
HOST这个东西不能随便乱设置……
祥瑞御免，家宅平安
========================
“山东啊……目前这个节目中的确是没有什么机密级的内容，但是从主持人的语气来看，这个节目的监督对帝国海军非常了解，我担心有海军内部的高级人员在参与。
严令山本，MI作战必须中止
