56. The following appeared as part of an article in a popular arts and leisure magazine.
The safety codes governing the construction of public buildings are becoming far too strict. The surest way for architects and builders to prove that they have met the minimum requirements established by these codes is to construct buildings by using the same materials and methods that are currently allowed. But doing so means that there will be very little significant technological innovation within the industry, and hence little evolution of architectural styles and design―merely because of the strictness of these safety codes.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The conclusion of this argument is that technological innovation as well as the evolution of architectural styles and design will be minimized in the future. The authors line of reasoning is that the imposition of strict safety codes on public buildings inhibits the evolution of architectural styles and design, because they discourage technological innovation within the building industry. Furthermore, the strictness of the codes governing public buildings discourages technological innovation because the surest way for architects and builders to pass the codes is to construct buildings that use the same materials and methods that are currently allowed. This argument is unconvincing for two reasons.
In the first place, the authors conclusion goes beyond the evidence presented. The evidence cited pertains only to the construction of public buildings, yet the author draws a conclusion about the building industry as a whole. Technological innovation and architectural experimentation in style and design in the construction of private buildings is not precluded by the reasons cited. Consequently, in the absence of evidence that similar problems beset the construction of privately owned buildings, the authors conclusion is not warranted.
In the second place, it is not evident that the strict safety codes governing public buildings will have the effects predicted by the author. Architectural styles and design are not dictated solely by the materials or the methods employed in construction. Consequently, it is premature to conclude that little evolution in style and design will occur because the materials and methods will likely remain the same. Moreover, technological innovation is not restricted to the use of new materials and methods. Significant technological innovation can be achieved by applying existing methods to new situations and by finding new uses for familiar materials.
In conclusion, the author has failed to make the case for the claim that technological innovation as well as the evolution of architectural styles and design will be minimized in the future. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that similar safety code restrictions impede the evolution of the design and the innovation of new technologies in the construction of private buildings. Additionally, the author must show that materials and methods are the prime determinants of architectural style and design.
莎士比亚在英国的受欢迎程度竟然不高?
为何女王圣诞祝辞不用Merry Christmas?
《白雪公主》中的小矮人竟然有名字!
伦敦的裸体餐馆,你敢去吗?
蜜月、亲爱的,这两个英文词的来历是什么?
含蓄内敛的英式客套话,你听得懂吗?
《查令街84号》和《不二情书》竟然有关系?
你知道为什么“11”在英文中不叫“ONETEEN”吗?
你知道数字三有何妙处吗?
可口可乐的十个秘密,你绝不知道(中)
爱时髦的clotheshorse
你觉得英语有统治世界的那一天吗?
帽子,英国皇室的最佳“情人”
欧美报纸有哪些?为您科普欧美报纸
美剧《布鲁克林》告诉你的西方PARTY STYLE
你知道如何防止恶作剧太过分吗?
美国人如何辨别中国人,你知道吗?(下)
你知道美国医院怎么挂号吗?
惊讶,英国女学生因裙子太短被遣送回家
你有“肉牙”吗?
感动!黑人头像终于被印上了美国纸币
你收过什么奇葩的圣诞礼物
美国人如何辨别中国人,你知道吗?(上)
嘉年华的来历,你知道吗?
奇葩,美国历史上的九条女性禁令(下)
囧吐槽:叫错名字这件小事儿
你知道欧洲人的血统,起源于哪里吗?
华尔街惊天秘密:人均收入36万刀
这十八个英语冷知识,你听说过吗
脸盲症 face blindness
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |