The following is a transcript of a statement made by a recording industry executive at an industry conference:　　“The music recording industry is suffering grave economic losses due to the widespread piracy of digital music. This fate was an inevitable result of the industry’s misguided decision to switch from the analogue format of vinyl records to the digital formats used today on compact disks and computer files. Copying a vinyl record requires expensive and bulky machinery, whereas anyone with a computer and an Internet connection can start up a music piracy business. To boost music revenues, the recording industry should switch entirely back to the analogue format of vinyl records. Also, I can state with complete authority that music just sounds better on a vinyl record.”　　Discuss how well-reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion, be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative examples or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

正确答案： 【参考范文】
The recording industry executive argues that in order to stem the tide of economic losses due to digital music piracy, the music recording industry should abandon the digital format entirely in favor of the old analogue format of vinyl records. While the executive does address a significant current problem for the music industry, the logic of his argument and the conclusion he reaches are both fundamentally flawed. Not only do the premises of his argument fail to support adequately his conclusion, but his conclusion would, if implemented, do more harm to the music industry than is currently inflicted by piracy.
To begin with, his premises are flawed. It is inaccurate to characterize the effects of digital formats on the music industry as “grave economic losses” when in fact the music industry has reaped far higher revenues by selling music in digital format—primarily compact disks— than it ever earned in the old analogue days of vinyl. Also, his somewhat irrelevant statement that “music just sounds better on vinyl” is supported only by his personal authority, which in this context cannot reasonably be characterized as “complete.” Finally, his assumption that switching to vinyl records will halt music piracy due to technical complications is inherently flawed, because those vinyl records could very easily be recorded onto digital formats and then distributed over the Internet. His chosen solution does not actually solve his specified problem.
The executive’s most fundamental error, however, is his failure to distinguish between stopping piracy and boosting revenue. Although his plan of reverting to an obsolete technology might, in a small way, impede the efforts of those who would use digital music unethically, it is more likely that it would result in far greater economic losses to the industry than are currently inflicted by piracy. The industry has switched overwhelmingly to digital formats because they offer a number of benefits both to the industry and to the consumer. For the industry, digital music is easier to produce and far less costly to distribute than bulky vinyl records. For consumers, digital formats such as compact disks and MP3s are far easier to store, sort through, and carry around than older analogue formats. For the whole industry to switch back to vinyl records would be like cutting off its nose to spite its face.
For the reasons stated above, the executive’s argument simply does not hold up. If he were truly serious about addressing the problem of digital music piracy, his time would be better spent investigating technological ways to make digital formats more resistant to piracy. This essay would earn a high score in the 5 to 6 range. The writer shows that he understands the argument being presented, but is not convinced by it for a number of reasons. He goes on to point out a series of flaws in the argument, and then to suggest an alternative approach to the question. By pointing out two potentially fatal flaws—the executive’s plan will not necessarily stop piracy, and it may harm the industry more than it can help it—the author presents a compelling case that the executive’s argument is fundamentally flawed.

解析： 暂无解析