A hand needs here. My issue and argument topic

Tuexy · 03:56 PM

I am preparing for the GRE test this year. Now I am working on the AWA. There are two eassays here. And I am want of your careful revision and good suggestion. Thanks..

TOPIC: ARGUMENT177 - The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.

"Membership in Oak City's Civic Club-a club whose primary objective is to discuss local issues-should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of the city. It is important to restrict membership to city residents because only residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could best be used to improve the city. At any rate, restricting membership in this way is unlikely to disappoint many of the nonresidents employed in Oak City, since neighboring Elm City's Civic Club has always had an open membership policy, and only twenty-five nonresidents have joined Elm City's Club in the last ten years."
WORDS: 400 TIME: 00:30:00 DATE: 2007-8-10 1:52:39

Membership of Oak City's Civic Club (O) restricted in only those residents in Oak city, while ruling out those people merely work but not live in there. The argument at first glance based on well logic ground; however, after deeply reflecting in the facts stated and cited by the writer, it proved to be a groundless idea. What's more, it even will stimulate such a oppose occurrence that is the very antithesis of the speaker's idea, the nonresidents will disappointed with such a restriction. Deep analysis about the problems with this argument will establish in my following passages.

The very vivid or distinct logic flaw here is the idea that nonresidents can't truly understand the case associated with business and politics of the city. Although those people spare less time than the residents since they must go home after the work in O, they also own the authority known the events occurred in O, and further make some thoughts on them, then lead their clearly understand even much deeper and more effective perspectives on the events of business and politician in O. It doesn't necessary that less living time in O will automatically lead less reflection and contemplation for those nonresidents. Understanding on those issues is unqualified depend upon the observation and concerning about them.

Again, it also unsubstantially that the residents pay city taxes will make them the single persons who understanding how the money could most rationally use to improve the city. The nonresidents don't pay such a tax, also have the opportunity to ask these residents to comprehensive the reasons and measures in making the use of the money. Thus, the speaker here absolutely ignores the potential possible initiative of those so-called nonresidents.

Secondly, even the nonresidents have the high possibility in falling of less understanding in the city's incidents, we also can't presumptuous agree that the nonresidents will not disappointed with such a decision, since it may give them a sensation of losing, especially when they cast a light for that they have made a lot for the contribution of O. We may have notice that the speaker here cited a study of the neighboring Elm City's Civic Club (E), which doesn’t form a high percentage for the nonresidents in its open membership policy. However, it is also possible that those nonresidents are actually took a very little weigh in the entire population in the E. So, the percentage may be an another situation.

Tuexy · **Re: A hand needs here. My issue and argument topic -** 10-08-2007, 12:11 PM

Continue: my issue..

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 402 TIME: 00:39:47 DATE: 2007-8-7 17:27:48

History, an old society science, broadly defined as the study of human-beings of societies past. Traditionally historians believe that it is precisely those famous few create the history, although they always depend upon groups of people to reach their success. This idea, although understands the emphasis of individuals in making history, ignores the very fact that the power of few persons is really poor in the course. To more scientifically saying, history bases on the entire persons' endeavor rather than merely those history celebrities.

Admittedly, great men in human history actually feature a very important role in human development and history advancement. After all, those famous are the elites of societies then, whose ideas and thought are more right, substantial and effective, therefore, stimulate the populace following his concept and may finally form a considerable extent part group, especially in political domain. Those groups leaded by the wise guard of those "potatoes", run effective accordingly, and ultimately achieve the final aims. Consider that if China were not leaded by the President Mao, Chinese may not so fortunate to earn a born of new China. According to this case, it is obviously that great in history aware public sooner and gives more wise leadership on them, ensuring a lot of reach gained by them quickly and easily.

Nonetheless, famous can't respect the total of history since the affection of individuals is often limitation. The majority, groups, communities of denizens are eventually the holder of history. Once Newton, the greatest physicists in science, if not the total human history, said that, "I was justly stood on the shoulder of giants. That is why I can see further than can you." This related aphorism shows that the history, even the history of science or science advance, should also contribute to those infamous momentous. To a deeper degree, those giants present some valuable ideas or measures associated with groups of common and just wait the application of them to achieve the very determination that is the history's advancement. If not those persons there assiduously work on the strategy famous advocated, there may never the history's advance.

Conclusively since the commonplace individuals are important as well as the famous few, in the process of study history, we should seek a balance between the public and the celebrities. If it is finally achieved, the study of history will sound like more the one based on facts.

HarshaRocks · **Re: A hand needs here. My issue and argument topic -** 10-08-2007, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tuexy

s believe that it is precisely those famous few create the hstory actually feature a very important role in human development and history ae leadership on them, ensuring a lot of reach gained by them quickly and easily.