ImageVerifierCode 换一换
格式:DOC , 页数:13 ,大小:39.50KB ,
资源ID:4458159      下载积分:7 金币
验证码下载
登录下载
邮箱/手机:
验证码: 获取验证码
温馨提示:
支付成功后,系统会自动生成账号(用户名为邮箱或者手机号,密码是验证码),方便下次登录下载和查询订单;
特别说明:
请自助下载,系统不会自动发送文件的哦; 如果您已付费,想二次下载,请登录后访问:我的下载记录
支付方式: 支付宝    微信支付   
验证码:   换一换

开通VIP
 

温馨提示:由于个人手机设置不同,如果发现不能下载,请复制以下地址【https://www.zixin.com.cn/docdown/4458159.html】到电脑端继续下载(重复下载【60天内】不扣币)。

已注册用户请登录:
账号:
密码:
验证码:   换一换
  忘记密码?
三方登录: 微信登录   QQ登录  
声明  |  会员权益     获赠5币     写作写作

1、填表:    下载求助     留言反馈    退款申请
2、咨信平台为文档C2C交易模式,即用户上传的文档直接被用户下载,收益归上传人(含作者)所有;本站仅是提供信息存储空间和展示预览,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容不做任何修改或编辑。所展示的作品文档包括内容和图片全部来源于网络用户和作者上传投稿,我们不确定上传用户享有完全著作权,根据《信息网络传播权保护条例》,如果侵犯了您的版权、权益或隐私,请联系我们,核实后会尽快下架及时删除,并可随时和客服了解处理情况,尊重保护知识产权我们共同努力。
3、文档的总页数、文档格式和文档大小以系统显示为准(内容中显示的页数不一定正确),网站客服只以系统显示的页数、文件格式、文档大小作为仲裁依据,个别因单元格分列造成显示页码不一将协商解决,平台无法对文档的真实性、完整性、权威性、准确性、专业性及其观点立场做任何保证或承诺,下载前须认真查看,确认无误后再购买,务必慎重购买;若有违法违纪将进行移交司法处理,若涉侵权平台将进行基本处罚并下架。
4、本站所有内容均由用户上传,付费前请自行鉴别,如您付费,意味着您已接受本站规则且自行承担风险,本站不进行额外附加服务,虚拟产品一经售出概不退款(未进行购买下载可退充值款),文档一经付费(服务费)、不意味着购买了该文档的版权,仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用,不得用于商业用途,未经授权,严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等,侵权必究。
5、如你看到网页展示的文档有www.zixin.com.cn水印,是因预览和防盗链等技术需要对页面进行转换压缩成图而已,我们并不对上传的文档进行任何编辑或修改,文档下载后都不会有水印标识(原文档上传前个别存留的除外),下载后原文更清晰;试题试卷类文档,如果标题没有明确说明有答案则都视为没有答案,请知晓;PPT和DOC文档可被视为“模板”,允许上传人保留章节、目录结构的情况下删减部份的内容;PDF文档不管是原文档转换或图片扫描而得,本站不作要求视为允许,下载前自行私信或留言给上传者【丰****】。
6、本文档所展示的图片、画像、字体、音乐的版权可能需版权方额外授权,请谨慎使用;网站提供的党政主题相关内容(国旗、国徽、党徽--等)目的在于配合国家政策宣传,仅限个人学习分享使用,禁止用于任何广告和商用目的。
7、本文档遇到问题,请及时私信或留言给本站上传会员【丰****】,需本站解决可联系【 微信客服】、【 QQ客服】,若有其他问题请点击或扫码反馈【 服务填表】;文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等,请点击“【 版权申诉】”(推荐),意见反馈和侵权处理邮箱:1219186828@qq.com;也可以拔打客服电话:4008-655-100;投诉/维权电话:4009-655-100。

注意事项

本文(GMAT-AA高分作文模板.doc)为本站上传会员【丰****】主动上传,咨信网仅是提供信息存储空间和展示预览,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对上载内容不做任何修改或编辑。 若此文所含内容侵犯了您的版权或隐私,请立即通知咨信网(发送邮件至1219186828@qq.com、拔打电话4008-655-100或【 微信客服】、【 QQ客服】),核实后会尽快下架及时删除,并可随时和客服了解处理情况,尊重保护知识产权我们共同努力。
温馨提示:如果因为网速或其他原因下载失败请重新下载,重复下载【60天内】不扣币。 服务填表

GMAT-AA高分作文模板.doc

1、GMAT-AA高分作文模板1. 我用的是800分大牛tonyadidas的AA 模版,但根据实际经验,对各段稍作精简(把拗口的一些词、句式去掉),再排了序(挑出常考到的高频理由)。 2. 画线处为经典的段首、尾句式,请务必背熟、灵活运用!因为各段内容可以现编,也常常编的是废话反复说,但有了这样漂亮的段首、尾来保障结构,就安全多了。 非常经典的开头、结尾看完题目就开始直接打这两段,边打边想理由!(经典)开头段模板 The conclusion endorsed in this argument is that. Several reasons are offered in support of

2、this argument. First of all, the author points out that. In addition, the author reasons that (Whats more, he also assumes that ) At first glance, the authors argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that the conclusion is based on some dubious assumptions and the r

3、easoning is biased due to the inadequacy and partiality in the nature of evidence provided to justify the conclusion. A careful examination would review how groundless this conclusion is. (经典)结尾段模板To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Accordingly, it is imprudent for the author

4、to claim that. To make this argument logically acceptable, the author would have to show that. In addition, to solidify the conclusion, the author should provide concrete evidence as well to demonstrate that. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional a

5、ppeal. (结尾中复述的理由就copy/paste开头中的理由) 高频理由(按频率由高到低排列)时序性因果攻击Firstly, the author is engaged in after this, therefore, because of this reasoning. The line of reasoning is that because A happened before B, the former caused the latter. However, this reasoning is fallacious unless other possible causal fac

6、tors have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C. As a result, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of B must be based on a more thorough investigation to gather data in order to narrow down and locate the actual cause of B. 同时性因果攻击Secondly, the authors solution rests on the a

7、ssumption that A is the cause of B just because A coincided with B. However, a mere positional correlation does not necessarily prove a causal relationship. In addition, all other prospective causes of B, such as C and D, must be ruled out. Without detailed analysis of the real source of B, it would

8、 be groundless to attribute B to A. 错误类比攻击Additionally, it is highly doubtful that strategies drawn from A are applicable to B. However, differences between these two clearly outweigh the similarities, therefore making the analogy much less valid. For example, C and D all affect A but virtually abse

9、nt in B. Accordingly, we can see that A and B are so dissimilar that B is unlikely to experience the same consequence if it adopts As strategies. 非此即彼攻击Last but not least, the author unfairly assumes that a reader must make a either-or choice. However, the argument fails to rule out possibility that

10、 adjusting A and B might produce better results. Moreover, if the author is wrong in the assumption that A and B are the only causes of the problem, thus the most effective solution might include a complex of other factorssuch as C and D. In any event, the author provides no justification for the mu

11、tually exclusive choice imposed on the reader. 必要性攻击In the first place, the author unfairly assumes that B was determined solely by A. While A is a seemingly important element in determining B, it is hardly the only or even necessarily required element. This assumption overlooks other crucial criter

12、ia in determining Bsuch as C, D. Without accounting for these potential factors, the author concludes too hastily that is the best way to achieve goals. 充分性攻击In the second place, the authors solution rests on the assumption that A is sufficient to give birth to the desired goals. However, if it turn

13、s out that B is due to a combination of factors, some of which will remain unchanged in the future, such as C and D, only A might have no impact on B. 选择性样本攻击 A threshold problem is that the author provides no evidence to claim that the general group as a whole is of the same characteristic. The exa

14、mple cited, while suggestive of this trend, is insufficient to warrant that the sample is representative of the whole group. For example, I question thatTherefore, such evidence would be obviously unrepresentative. In fact, in face of such limited evidence, it is fallacious for the author to draw an

15、y conclusion at all. (与“选择性样本攻击”较类似) 样本代表性攻击Moreover, a possible methodology problem in the argument is that it is of bias. The term so many is too vague to be statistically meaningful. It is very possible that workers who were more interested in the survey might be likely to respond to the question

16、naire. Lacking in the information about the number of workers surveyed and the number of respondents, it is impossible to assess the validity of the survey. For instance, if 1000 workers were surveyed but only 10 responded, the result should be highly suspect. Because the author fails to account for

17、 other interpretations, the survey would be useless in concluding that. 其他理由忽略他因攻击Thirdly, the author has focused only on A. A more detailed analysis would reveal that other factors far outweigh the factor on which the author focuses. For example, C. Lacking a more comprehensive analysis of the caus

18、es, it is presumptuous for the author to claim that A solely determined B. 因果倒置攻击At last, it is possible that the author has confused cause with effect. Perhaps A was a response to B. Since the author fails to account for this possibility, the claim that is completely unwarranted. 样本数量攻击 Another pro

19、blem that seriously weakens the logic of this argument is that the survey cited is based on too small a sample to be reliable. Offered in support of the argument, the only evidence is that. Unless it can be shown that the sample is typical of all general group, the fact that is groundless to claim t

20、hat Loaded question和诚实性攻击 Whats more, the methodology of the survey is problematic for two reasons. For one thing, we are not informed whether the survey provided only 3 alternatives. If it did, the respondents, who might very well prefer another choice not provided in the survey, might be forced to

21、 give up their preferences. For another thing, we are not informed whether the survey responses were anonymous or confidential. The respondents might supply responses favored by their superiors who might conduct the survey. Both events would lead this survey unreliable, let alone draw the conclusion

22、 that 样本时效性攻击Last but not least, another flaw that significantly undermines this argument is that the author neglects to indicate how recently the survey was actually conducted. When used to generally claim a particular group, the samples should be close enough to support the generalization, in orde

23、r to prevent historical changes from invalidating the generalization. All we know is that the survey is recently published. The less recent the survey itself, the less reliable the results to demonstrate that 差异概念攻击To begin with, we must establish the meaning of the vague concept A. If the term were

24、 synonymous with B, the evidence cited would strongly support the argument. However, A may be defined in other terms such as C and D. Accordingly, the author has drawn the conclusion too hastily due to the ignorance of other definitions of A. 范围内推攻击 Whats more, the most egregious reasoning error in

25、this argument is that the author uses evidence pertaining to a general group on the basis of a particular B. Even if the reasoning may be sound in general sense, the particular situation in which B is involved may not be representative of the entire general group. It is possible that. If this is the

26、 case, the claim that is ill founded. 不随时变攻击Moreover, the author unfairly assumes that A will remain unchanged over the next decades. However, a mere recent one-year A is insufficient to claim that. Statistics from such limited anecdotal evidence is not a good indicator for this trend. In addition,

27、it is possible that in the future, this trend would greatly fluctuate or even reverse, then the adoption of the authors proposal might give birth to B, however, it might also have a negative impact on C1 and, in turns, C2. Admittedly, this argument would be even weaker and weaker each day as time goes by

移动网页_全站_页脚广告1

关于我们      便捷服务       自信AI       AI导航        获赠5币

©2010-2024 宁波自信网络信息技术有限公司  版权所有

客服电话:4008-655-100  投诉/维权电话:4009-655-100

gongan.png浙公网安备33021202000488号   

icp.png浙ICP备2021020529号-1  |  浙B2-20240490  

关注我们 :gzh.png    weibo.png    LOFTER.png 

客服