GRE作文入門和進階九　　

　　The correlation of the high irons level and heart disease the arguer trying to prove is not as perfect as he assumes. Although at first glance， his cause-and-effect analysis seems quite cogent， yet it cant stand much reexamination.

　　I agree to the well-established theory concerning the necessary relation between the large amount of red meat in peoples diet and heart disease， but no other possibilities can be ruled out except for one of the ingredients-iron. It is obvious that the arguer constructs his building of conclusion on the basis of the conviction of the deleterious function stems from the iron. While not only a single iron does red meat contain， as we all know， many other components also have the influential role once being indigested into human body. For instance， some type of particular protein it might include， instead of the iron， is the substantial root of heart attack. So the arguers peroration has no convincing power for this gratuitous assumption.

　　Moreover， even though his deduction does really derive from some passage of authoritative researches he has no opportunity to list below， the assertion about the high levels of iron related to the possibility of heart disease cannot be got through by merely so qualified the evidence exhibited here. According to the arguers elicitation， we believe the red meat does contain large amount of iron， however， we might ask ourselves such questions enlightened by our common sense， Does the amount of iron involved in red meat reach the dangerous level enough to lead to heart disease? The answer we cant obtain through this short argument， thus directly make us doubt the whole fruits the arguer attained.

　　As it stands， the study reported on the published media Eating for Health is inevitable filled with some lethal logic fallacies， which finally weakens the cogency of the whole claims. To such a paramount and sensitive issue relative to peoples health and life， scrutiny is not allowed to be neglected; and it is just for this point， Im afraid， no people could ultimately abjure for eating red meat as a result of reading this ridiculous article.

　　silentwings

　　原則二：大膽創新，敢于說不。

　　這個原則是就思想內容本身而提出的，主要就ISSUE而言。之所以如此，是因為現在的題庫中有太多顯而易見的明顯帶有常識偏見性的話題，比如下面我們要舉例說明的這一題：

　　33.Creating an appealing image has become more important in contemporary society than is the reality or truth behind that image.

　　我想大部分考生在現場一定會不約而同地對這道題說DISAGREE，因為傳統的教育和是非觀很容易讓我們接受這樣的一個觀點人不可貌像，海水不可斗量。這樣，ETS膽敢認為表面的虛浮外表比實質的東西重要，充分暴露了它資本主義沒落腐朽的罪惡本質和虛偽貪婪的丑惡嘴臉，于是打筆一揮，打他個鼻青臉腫再說。

　　不可否認，這個話題寫否定符合正常價值觀和正常思維，比較容易找到地方下手，但是平常我們在訓練準備作文時，應該在遇到這類難于從反面論證的題目盡量擯棄這種正常思維，而鍛煉自己的創新思維，即敢于對自己的陳規思維說不!大家可以發現，ETS找來的每道話題都是經過嚴格的篩選和試驗的，以保證其客觀性和公正性，從而無論你對該話題持什么態度，都不會影響你在現實中的表現，從而每個觀點闡述就是一種思維邏輯的游戲，ETS不是要看你的思想觀點到底出不出格，而是看你將任何一個你所持有的觀點論證的天衣無縫。

　　因為在ISSUE中，你完全可以將一個漏洞百出的話題包裝成真理，同樣也可將真理辯駁成天大的謬誤，這沒有關系，對于一個特別注重新思維開發的美國人來說，創新思維無疑是他們最鐘愛的東西，這也就是高分作文的一個捷徑求新求異!我始終相信，只要肯往這方面想，思維的馬達很容易就開動起來，通過不斷練習，你真的會發現你的一手銅齒鐵牙已經足以讓你在GRE作文的考場上稱雄稱霸，滿分是意料中的事。下面我提供兩篇范文，第一篇是正常思維論辯，第二篇則是從AGREE的角度來論證，讀者可以從中參詳一二。

　　GRE作文入門和進階九　　

　　The correlation of the high irons level and heart disease the arguer trying to prove is not as perfect as he assumes. Although at first glance， his cause-and-effect analysis seems quite cogent， yet it cant stand much reexamination.

　　I agree to the well-established theory concerning the necessary relation between the large amount of red meat in peoples diet and heart disease， but no other possibilities can be ruled out except for one of the ingredients-iron. It is obvious that the arguer constructs his building of conclusion on the basis of the conviction of the deleterious function stems from the iron. While not only a single iron does red meat contain， as we all know， many other components also have the influential role once being indigested into human body. For instance， some type of particular protein it might include， instead of the iron， is the substantial root of heart attack. So the arguers peroration has no convincing power for this gratuitous assumption.

　　Moreover， even though his deduction does really derive from some passage of authoritative researches he has no opportunity to list below， the assertion about the high levels of iron related to the possibility of heart disease cannot be got through by merely so qualified the evidence exhibited here. According to the arguers elicitation， we believe the red meat does contain large amount of iron， however， we might ask ourselves such questions enlightened by our common sense， Does the amount of iron involved in red meat reach the dangerous level enough to lead to heart disease? The answer we cant obtain through this short argument， thus directly make us doubt the whole fruits the arguer attained.

　　As it stands， the study reported on the published media Eating for Health is inevitable filled with some lethal logic fallacies， which finally weakens the cogency of the whole claims. To such a paramount and sensitive issue relative to peoples health and life， scrutiny is not allowed to be neglected; and it is just for this point， Im afraid， no people could ultimately abjure for eating red meat as a result of reading this ridiculous article.

　　silentwings

　　原則二：大膽創新，敢于說不。

　　這個原則是就思想內容本身而提出的，主要就ISSUE而言。之所以如此，是因為現在的題庫中有太多顯而易見的明顯帶有常識偏見性的話題，比如下面我們要舉例說明的這一題：

　　33.Creating an appealing image has become more important in contemporary society than is the reality or truth behind that image.

　　我想大部分考生在現場一定會不約而同地對這道題說DISAGREE，因為傳統的教育和是非觀很容易讓我們接受這樣的一個觀點人不可貌像，海水不可斗量。這樣，ETS膽敢認為表面的虛浮外表比實質的東西重要，充分暴露了它資本主義沒落腐朽的罪惡本質和虛偽貪婪的丑惡嘴臉，于是打筆一揮，打他個鼻青臉腫再說。

　　不可否認，這個話題寫否定符合正常價值觀和正常思維，比較容易找到地方下手，但是平常我們在訓練準備作文時，應該在遇到這類難于從反面論證的題目盡量擯棄這種正常思維，而鍛煉自己的創新思維，即敢于對自己的陳規思維說不!大家可以發現，ETS找來的每道話題都是經過嚴格的篩選和試驗的，以保證其客觀性和公正性，從而無論你對該話題持什么態度，都不會影響你在現實中的表現，從而每個觀點闡述就是一種思維邏輯的游戲，ETS不是要看你的思想觀點到底出不出格，而是看你將任何一個你所持有的觀點論證的天衣無縫。

　　因為在ISSUE中，你完全可以將一個漏洞百出的話題包裝成真理，同樣也可將真理辯駁成天大的謬誤，這沒有關系，對于一個特別注重新思維開發的美國人來說，創新思維無疑是他們最鐘愛的東西，這也就是高分作文的一個捷徑求新求異!我始終相信，只要肯往這方面想，思維的馬達很容易就開動起來，通過不斷練習，你真的會發現你的一手銅齒鐵牙已經足以讓你在GRE作文的考場上稱雄稱霸，滿分是意料中的事。下面我提供兩篇范文，第一篇是正常思維論辯，第二篇則是從AGREE的角度來論證，讀者可以從中參詳一二。