Animals for Food, Clothing and Medicine
Essay Topic as Seen in China
April 28, 2012
海外大學(xué)教師謝振禮投稿

議論文試題簡(jiǎn)直題題都有難念的經(jīng)。2012年4月28日的大作文好像埋下陷阱，一不小心就以為是與一道老題目完全相同。記得雅思出過(guò)好幾次關(guān)于利用動(dòng)物作科學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)的考題， 也考過(guò)如何保護(hù)面臨絕跡的動(dòng)物。但這次題目不一樣。

通常關(guān)鍵字偏多則論證較難，所以跑題風(fēng)險(xiǎn)也較大，真是不知道何去何從。題目說(shuō)現(xiàn)代人“no longer necessary” 不再需要“animals for food, clothing, medicine” 利用動(dòng)物產(chǎn)品作為食物，衣裳，醫(yī)療。你同意還是不同意這種看法？回答這種問(wèn)題往往難以摸著心肝講道理。

當(dāng)今世界真的可以不再糟蹋動(dòng)物——吃其肉，穿其皮，做藥品？若說(shuō)同意則好像很有假裝的道德良心，而卻這個(gè)立場(chǎng)也比較方便吹牛。說(shuō)不同意又好像良心不安，等于支持可以繼續(xù)宰割動(dòng)物，不顧動(dòng)物的痛苦死活。范文作者干脆陳述兩種觀點(diǎn)，冒充討好兩方的立場(chǎng)，卻也偏向提出不同意的立場(chǎng)。

每當(dāng)讀范文，最好把自己當(dāng)做考官。檢驗(yàn)下一篇原創(chuàng)范文，如果找不到主題，那肯定是跑題了。如果看到連貫不成邏輯，那也肯定結(jié)構(gòu)有毛病。如果發(fā)現(xiàn)論證微弱，那更肯定是缺乏內(nèi)容。

再進(jìn)一步檢驗(yàn)英文的用語(yǔ)，用句，用字。文法的缺點(diǎn)在哪里——修辭效率？句法變化？字匯適當(dāng)？如何改進(jìn)？
顯然作者的母語(yǔ)不是英語(yǔ)?？墒牵刚Z(yǔ)外教又如何寫(xiě)議論文，能令讀者心服口服？母語(yǔ)寫(xiě)作教練的優(yōu)勢(shì)是什么，是不是只有英文道地，作文不夠雅思？中教的長(zhǎng)處是不是僅僅會(huì)講國(guó)語(yǔ)兼做翻譯，因?yàn)橛⑽牟粔虻赖兀?br />
明眼人知道低分寫(xiě)作的苦衷是六盞燈不全亮——作文的主題，結(jié)構(gòu)，內(nèi)容；英文的修辭，句法，字匯。英文作文高分的定義，最好去問(wèn)考官，或參考官方公布的寫(xiě)作評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

Topic>真題回憶不清

In the modern world, it is no longer necessary to use animals for food, or animal products for clothing and medicine, for example. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.


Example Writing
By Jeenn Lee Hsieh

Trying to live without exploiting animals for food, clothing or medicine can be a healthy lifestyle, except that that would probably never become a fashion. People in the modern world seem to agree that it is not 100 percent justified to eat meat, clothe in leather, or use animals as medical research subjects; nevertheless, very few people would like to choose to live the vegan way for the benefits of animals, people and the planet. The case for animal rights is likely to go nowhere simply because people can have a choice but animals cannot.

It would be out of the question to imagine that non-human animals could voice their own opinions. As it is, the question whether animals have rights as humans do has never been considered seriously. More recently, however, pro-animal and vegan groups have joined forces in supporting one basic right for animals: the right not to be property. Roughly speaking, people take it for granted that they own the world which they actually do. Of course, the animal welfare movement is being promoted to illustrate no more than moral conscience, certainly with little, if any, cognitive knowledge of, or obvious understanding from animals themselves. As a result, amid various points of view, a parallel argument is that there is nothing inherently wrong with using animals as resources so long as there is no unnecessary suffering.

On the other hand, even today common sense seems to imply that humans are licensed to kill animals for food, clothing or medicine. As if authorized by Heaven, people also make animals suffer in other things, including hard labor in farms and transportation as well as entertainment in circus shows. Discussed as a whole, this is more an issue on habitual necessity, or religious, ethnic and health backgrounds, rather than on mere survival . Although the vegan way of life is a healthy choice, most people cannot accept eating a plant-based diet, nor can they avoid using animal by-products for many purposes. Given that plants can theoretically feed, cover and cure, there is nothing like what comes from animals. In short, talking about sparing animals and leaving them alone is too cheap to carry weight since not every person is willing to be a vegan in the real sense of the word.

In all appearances, the animal debate attracts some attention but does not lead to enough action to reduce the pain of animals. Without wearing something like leather jackets and knowing to use medicines from animals, for instance, humans are in part similar to the omnivorous rats that eat anything . So, it is next to impossible for people to change the carnivorous habits and become entirely herbivorous because humans are not born vegans. (Essay created by Jeenn Lee Hsieh)