GRE作文范文 Argument-8

　　As people grow older,an enzyme known as PEP increasingly breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in learning and memory.But now,researchers haver found compounds that prevent PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart.In tests,thesse compounds almost completely restored lost memory in rats.The use of these compounds should before serious problems in school performance will be reduced.Science finally has a solution for problems neither parents nor teachers could solve.

　　嘉文博译Sample Essay

　　In this argument,the arguer states that reseachers have found compounds that keep an enzyme known as PEP from breaking neuropetides apart,which are known to be involed in learing and memory. The arguer states that tests have shown that these compounds almost completely restrored lost memory in rats,and thattherefore,these compounds should be administered to students with poor memory and difficulty in concentrating.This argument is unconvincing because it contains several critical flaws in logic.

　　First of all, the arguer states that as people grow older,PEP breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals that are involved in learning and memory.Itis true that generally,as people get older,they tend to have more problems with learning and memory.However,there is no direct link mentioned between the breaking down of the neuropeptide chemical and the loss of learning ability or memory.Additionally,the arguer mentions neuropeptide chemicals that are broken down of PEP.What the researchers have found is a compound that prevents neuropeptide chemicals as opposed to the breaking apart of the neuropeptides themselves.Furthermore,it is not stated which of these physical actions is involved with the loss of learning ability and memory.Itis not explicity stated that breaking down of chemicals causes a loss in ;earning ability and memory, only that this happens as grow older.It is also not expressly stated whether the breaking apart of the neuropeptides themselves causes memory loss or a lessened learning ability. Without showing a direct link between the effect of kepping the neuropeptides from breaking apart a reduction in the loss of memory and learning ability,the efficacy of the compounds is called into question.

　　Secondly and most obviously,the compounds wereonlytested on rats.Rats may have a similar genetic structure to humans,but they are most certainly not the same as humans.There may be different causes for the learning and memory problems in rats as opposed to that of humans.The effect of the compounds on rats may also be very different from their effect on humans beings.It is adsurd in the extreme to advocate giving these compounds to students,even assuming that they would help the students with their studies,without conducting further studies assessing the compounds'overall effects on humans.The argument fails on this particular fact if for no other reason.

　　Additionally,the arguer begins his or er argument by stating that"as people grow older",PEP breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in leaving and memory.At the end of the argument,the arguer advocates extending the compounds that prevent PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart to students who haver poor memory and diffculty in concentrating.Students are generally young,not older people.There is no difficulty in concentrating.Indeed,it is more likely that it is extracurricular activities or a lack of sleep that cause such problems in students,not a problem associated with aging.It is highly unlikely that even if the stated compounds cound help prevent the memory loss and decreased learning ability associated with aging that it would have any benefits for students.

　　In summary, the arguer fails to convince with the argument as presented.To strengthen the argument,the arguer must show a direct link between the breaking apart of neuropeptides and loss of memory and learning ability.Additionally,he or she must show that students' poor memory and diffculty in concentrating is a result of the same process,and that the researcher's compounds would have as beneficial an effec on humans as it seems to haver on rats.

　　(633 words)

　　参考译文

　　随着人们日渐衰老，一种被称为PEP的酶会不断地分解学习与记忆过程中所涉及到的神经肽化学物。但现在，研究人员已发现了可阻止PEP致使神经肽分裂的化合物。在实验中，这些化合物几乎在老鼠身上能完全恢复缺失的记忆。这些化合物的运用应该也推广到记忆力衰弱或专注力有困难的学生身上，那样他们在学业表现上的这些严重问题即可得到缓解，科学终于解决了那些令家长和老师束手无耻的问题。

　　在本段论述中，论述者指出，研究人员已经发现某些化合物可以阻止一种被称为PEP的酶的物质分解神经肽，而神经肽则是学习和记忆过程中所涉及到的物质。论述者还宣称，检测结果表明，这些化合物几乎完全恢复了老鼠缺失的记忆。因此这些化合物应该让那些记忆力差的难于集中学习的学生服用。这段论述缺乏说服力，因为它包含着某些逻辑推理方面甚为严重的缺陷。

　　首先，论述者称，随着人们渐趋衰老，PEP会分解学习和记忆过程中所涉及的神经肽化学物。确实，随着人们渐趋衰老，他们通长会在学习和记忆方面遭遇诸多问题。但是，在神经肽化学物的分解以及学习能力与记忆力丧失之间，却没有提到任何直接的联系。除此之外，论述者提及了被PEP所分解的几种神经肽化学物。但研究人员所发现的只是一种可阻止射精太不至于分裂的化合物。这时两种不同性质的物理作用：神经肽化学物的分解有别于射精太自身的分裂。再者，原论述并未陈述这两种物理作用中的哪一种与学习能力和记忆能力的丧失有关。论述者没有明确陈述这两种化学物的分解会导致学习能力和记忆能力的丧失，而只是陈述了这种情形只是随着人们日趋衰老而发生。原论述中也没有确切地陈述神经肽自身的分裂是否会导致记忆缺失或学习能力下降。如果无法在阻止神经肽分裂所能产生的作用于减少记忆能力和学习能力的丧失之间证明某种直接的联系，那么，化合物的效用将令人质疑。

　　第二，也是极为明显地，化合物只是在老鼠身上进行了实验。虽然老鼠与人类具有类似的基因结构，但他们无论如何并不等同于人类。造成老鼠学习和记忆问题的原因很可能全然不同于造成人类学习和记忆问题的原因。在没有进一步的研究来评估化合物对人类所产生的总体效果的情况下，就提倡学生服用这些化合物，甚至假设他们会有助于学生提高其学习效果，这实在荒唐至极。即使没有其他原因，就这一特定事实本身而论，该段论述也根本就站不住脚。

　　进一步而言，论述者在其论述的开始称，“随着人们渐趋衰老”，PEP会将学习和记忆过程中所涉及的神经肽化学物进行分解。在论述的结尾之处，论述者倡导将那些可阻止PEP致使神经肽分裂的化合物推广至那些记忆力和专注力差的学生身上。学生一般都是年轻人，而不是老年人。论述者没有拿出任何证据来证明究竟是什么原因实际导致学生们记忆力和专注力下降。事实上，更有可能是那些课外活动，或缺少充足的睡眠，导致了学生的这些问题与衰老毫无关系。即使所提及的那些化合物真的有助于防止与衰老毫无关系。即使所提及的那些化合物真的有助于防止与衰老相关的记忆缺失问题和学习能力下降问题，也极不可能会给学生带来任何的裨益。

　　总而言之，论述者没有能说服我们，若要使其论点成立，论述者必须在神经肽的分裂与记忆能力和学习能力的缺失之间证明有某种直接的联系。此外，论述者也必须证明学生记忆能力差和注意力难以集中均是同一过程造成的，并且研究员所发现的化合物对人类产生的效果会与对老鼠似乎所产生的效果同样好。