GRE作文范文 Argument-33

“A recent study suggests that people who are left-handed are more likely to succeed in business than are right-handed people. Researchers studied photographs of 1,000 prominent business executives and found that 21 percent of these executives wrote with their left hand. So the percentage of prominent business executives who are left-handed (21 percent) is almost twice the percentage of people in the general population who are left-handed (11 percent). Thus, people who are left-handed would be well advised to pursue a career in business, whereas people who are right-handed would be well advised to imitate the business practices exhibited by left-handers.”

嘉文博譯Sample Essay

This arguer claims that a recent study suggests that left-handed people are more likely to succeed in business than right-handed people. For support, the arguer cites the results of a study where researchers studied photographs of one thousand prominent business executives and found that twenty-one percent wrote with their left hand. The arguer claims that the percentage of left-handed prominent business executives is almost twice that of left-handed people in the general population (eleven percent). The arguer then concludes that left-handed people should pursue a career in business while right-handed people should copy the business practices of left-handed people. This argument fails to convince on its premise because it is based on faulty reasoning.

First of all, there are problems with the research study itself. By studying only photographs rather than the actual people, there are two errors that may occur in drawing conclusions regarding which hand the subjects actually use to write. It is possible that although they were photographed with a pen in their left hand or apparently writing with their left hand, the business executives are in reality right-handed or ambidextrous. Merely looking at photographs is a poor substitute for actually observing or interviewing the business executives. Furthermore, in many cases with photographs, the negatives have been reversed when the photograph is printed, thereby reversing right and left. Although it may appear that the business executive is writing with his or her left hand, in reality he or she may have been using the right hand instead, or vice versa. The possibility of flaws in the research study itself critically weakens this argument.

Secondly, the arguer’s contention that the study suggests that people who are left-handed are more likely to succeed in business is wrong. Even assuming the accuracy of the study, only twenty-one percent of prominent business executives were said to write with their left hands. The vast majority of seventy-nine percent of prominent business executives wrote with their right hands. Simple mathematics shows that there are more right-handed prominent business executives than left-handed ones. Moreover, being a “prominent” business executive does not necessarily equal success in business. The arguer has framed the definition of success in business as becoming a “prominent business executive” when there are many other valid definitions of what makes one a success in business. One certainly does not have to be “prominent” nor a “business executive” to be successful in business. Failing to address these features of the research study further weakens this argument.

Finally, it simply does not follow that left-handed people should pursue a career in business and that right-handed people should imitate the business practices of left-handers. There are far too many other variables involved with success in business than solely which hand a person writes with. Inner-motivation, perseverance and just plain good luck are far more likely indicators of an individual’s success in business. To pursue any type of career or particular business practices based on such a flawed and ambiguous study would be the height of foolishness.

To summarize, the value of the research study itself is highly questionable because it is based on merely looking at photographs, which may be misleading. Furthermore, the arguer uses percentages that are not directly comparable with each other to attempt to show a correlation between which hand a person writes with and potential success in business. This argument is tenuous at best and should be rejected without better, more convincing evidence submitted for support.

(581 words)

參考譯文

最近的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查表明，習(xí)慣用左手的人比習(xí)慣用右手的人更可能在企業(yè)里取得成功。研究人員研究了1000位優(yōu)秀的企業(yè)主管的照片，發(fā)現(xiàn)百分之二十一的主管用左手寫字。而習(xí)慣用左手的優(yōu)秀企業(yè)主管的比率(21%)幾乎是習(xí)慣用右手的總?cè)藬?shù)的比率(11%)的一倍。因此，那些習(xí)慣用左手的人應(yīng)該在企業(yè)求職，而對(duì)于習(xí)慣用右手的人來說，模仿習(xí)慣用左手的人所表現(xiàn)出來的商業(yè)做法不失為一項(xiàng)明智之舉。

這位論證者聲稱，最近的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查表明，習(xí)慣用左手的人比習(xí)慣用右手的人更有可能在企業(yè)里取得成功。為了支持其論點(diǎn)，論證者引用了一項(xiàng)調(diào)查的結(jié)果，說研究人員研究了1000位優(yōu)秀企業(yè)主管的照片，發(fā)現(xiàn)其中21%的人用左手寫字。論證者說道，習(xí)慣用左手的優(yōu)秀企業(yè)主管的比率幾乎是習(xí)慣用右手的總?cè)藬?shù)的比率(11%)的一倍。論證者然后得出結(jié)論：習(xí)慣用左手的人應(yīng)該在企業(yè)謀職而習(xí)慣用右手的人應(yīng)該模仿用左手的人的商業(yè)行為。這一論證沒能在其前提上令人信服，因?yàn)樗墙⒃阱e(cuò)誤的推理基礎(chǔ)之上。

首先，該項(xiàng)研究本身不乏某些問題。由于只研究人的照片而不是研究實(shí)際的人，因此，圍繞著受試者實(shí)際用哪只手來寫字，在得出結(jié)論時(shí)將會(huì)產(chǎn)生兩種謬誤。情況有可能是，盡管他們?cè)谂恼諘r(shí)左手持筆，或表面上作出左手寫字的模樣，這些企業(yè)主管們實(shí)際上卻是慣于使右手的，或者是兩手都善用的。只看相片，遠(yuǎn)比不上實(shí)際觀察或面試這些企業(yè)主管。此外，就這些相片而言，在許多情況下，在相片沖洗時(shí)，底片被顛倒，從而將左右弄反。雖然給人的印象是某位企業(yè)主管正用其左手寫字，但實(shí)際上他/她可能正好相反，所使用的卻是右手。反之亦然。這項(xiàng)研究本身所有可能存在的缺陷嚴(yán)重削弱了本項(xiàng)論述。

其次，論述者所提出的論點(diǎn)，即該項(xiàng)研究表明慣于使左手的人更易于取得商業(yè)成功。這本身就是謬誤的。即使假設(shè)該項(xiàng)研究精確無誤，但也僅有21%的杰出企業(yè)主管據(jù)稱使用左手寫字。占79%的絕大多數(shù)著名企業(yè)主管使用右手寫字。進(jìn)行簡(jiǎn)單的數(shù)學(xué)計(jì)算就可表明，善使右手的杰出企業(yè)主管在數(shù)量上遠(yuǎn)超過善使左手的企業(yè)主管。除此之外，做一個(gè)杰出的企業(yè)主管并不必然等同于商業(yè)成功。當(dāng)何謂“商業(yè)成功”實(shí)際上存在著如許多其他有效定義的時(shí)候，論述者對(duì)商業(yè)成功所下的定義卻將其僅限于“成為一個(gè)杰出的企業(yè)主管”。毫無疑問，要取得商業(yè)成功，人們既沒有必要成為“杰出人物”，也沒有必要成為“企業(yè)主管”。該項(xiàng)研究由于沒能探討這些方面的內(nèi)容而使論證缺乏力度。

最后，有一點(diǎn)是不合邏輯的，即凡是左撇子都應(yīng)該追求一種商界生涯，而右撇子就應(yīng)該去模仿左撇子的商業(yè)實(shí)踐。商業(yè)成功涉及到許許多多其他可變性因素，而決非僅僅限制在慣于使用哪只手的問題。內(nèi)在的動(dòng)機(jī)、鍥而不舍的精神以及好運(yùn)氣等更有可能來表明一種商業(yè)上的成功。如果以這樣一種存在嚴(yán)重缺陷且又模棱兩可的研究為依據(jù)去追求任何類型的職業(yè)生涯或某些特定的商業(yè)實(shí)踐，將不啻于是愚蠢至極。

概而言之，該項(xiàng)研究的價(jià)值令人極感疑惑，因?yàn)樗鼉H僅以看相片這一有可能產(chǎn)生誤導(dǎo)作用的行為來作為其依據(jù)。其次，論述者使用了相互間并不具有直接可比性的兩組百分比以期證明，在一個(gè)人寫字時(shí)所使用的左手或右手與其商業(yè)上的潛在成敗之間存在著某種邏輯聯(lián)系。本項(xiàng)論述充其量也是極為薄弱的，在不能提供更為充分且更有說服力的證據(jù)來支持它的情況下應(yīng)徹底予以擯棄。