Do celebrities deserve more privacy than they have now? I believe that famous entertainers and athletes should have more privacy than they have now. The following are my reasons. First of all, celebrities are just normal people who chose a career in acting, singing or playing sports. Since privacy is a fundamental human right, entertainers and athletes deserve to have privacy too. For example, if you run into a celebrity in a street, I believe that you should ask for permission before taking picture of he or she. In addition, privacy violating behaviors may cause fetal accidents. The most well known example is Queen Diana who was died in a fetal car accident caused by chasing reporters. I think people should learn from this painful lesson, giving the celebrities more privacy that they deserve. Last but not least, famous entertainers and athletes should have right to make friends, spend time with family and have a relationship. However, these normal social activities are strongly affected by privacy violating behaviors. For example, a celebrity can not spend quality time with his or her kids in a public park without people constantly taking pictures of them. Moreover, a celebrity probably will not take his or her kids to public places in order to protect his or her kids' privacy. In other words, privacy violating behaviors affect not only celebrities themselves but also people surrounding them. There is no way this is right. In conclusion, I think celebrities deserve more privacy than they have now with no doubts.

Is it a good idea to offer school kids money for each high grade? I don't think it is a good idea for parents to offer their school-age children money for each high grade. The following are my reasons. First of all, I believe that the most important thing parents should teach their children is being responsible for themselves. In other words, children should study hard to get high scores because they are responsible for their job as students not because their parents offer them money to perform great. For example, I always remembered that when I was a child, my parents told me that I studied for my self not for them. I learned to be responsible for myself. Moreover, I am benefited from this good manner at work. In addition, self-motivation is also an important thing that each child should learn. If parents offer money to motivate their children, they actually take away their children's oppotunites to learn how to motivate themselves. In the long term, it will do more harm than good to their children. Take one of my friend as an example, his parents used to offer money for high scores he got in school, and when his parents stopped offering money he lose the motivation to do well in school. That's why I think offering children money for each high grade is a bad idea and parents should not do this.

Analytical Writing Assessment: Practice 04 The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter: "The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs." Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. My response: The author points out that a recently survey indicates that 79% of the surveyed workers showed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits. Thus, the author concludes that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false or at least outdated. However, I don’t think the author’s reasoning is logical. First of all, corporate restructuring and redesign benefits programs are topics that directly influent workers. The author fails to consider that the workers expressed a high level of interest in these topics may just because these topics are what the workers care about most. In other words, the workers interest in these topics do not mean that they will definitely interest in management issues in general. In addition, the author does not mention the percentage of the workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in other topics. A higher percentage of the workers may showed high interest level in other topics, making that management issues the least topics they concern. In conclusion, the author’s argument is not well-reasoned. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional evidence to support his or her conclusion.

Analytical Writing Assessment: Practice 03 The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods: "Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits." Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. My response: The statement suggests that the costs of processing are decreasing over time. It points out that the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell 30 cents from 1970 to 1984. Thus, it concludes that Olympic Foods will minimize costs and thus maximize profits, since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday. However, I don’t think the statement is logically sound. First of all, the costs of processing do not go down solely because time passing. Instead, advanced technology, improved manpower management and simplified processing procedure may count for the decreasing costs. In other words, there is no proof of a direct-cause relationship between aging and cost efficiency. Therefore, it’s not logical to assume that Olympic Foods will minimize costs while reaching 25th anniversary. In addition, costs of color film processing went down doesn’t mean that costs of food processing will go down too. The statement falsely assumes that what happened in color film processing will happen in food processing. Last but not least, the statement fails to consider the possibility that Olympic Foods doesn’t decrease its processing costs even the whole food processing industry does. In conclusion, the statement is not convincing. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional evidence to support his or her conclusion.

Analytical Writing Assessment: Practice 02 The following appeared in an article in a health–and–fitness magazine: "Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health." Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. My response: The author first states that research found out that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several healthy ingredients and it is completely free of bacteria. Then, the author states that residents of Saluda are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Therefore, the author concludes that drinking bottled Natural Spring Water instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health. However, I don’t think that the author’s argument is reasonably sound. First of all, the author failes to consider that tap water of Saluda could also be Saluda Natural Spring Water. Saluda Natural Spring Water is bottled in Saluda doesn’t mean that bottle water is the only resource of Saluda Natural Spring Water. There might be plenty of Saluda Natural Spring Water, so it is bottled in order to sell to other places. In addition, Saluda Natural Spring Water may not be the only reason that residents of Saluda are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. For example, less environment pollution, healthy life style and balanced diet may lead to above average health of Saluda residents. Last but not least, there is possibility that the process of bottling may damage contained minerals. In other words, bottled Saluda Natural Spring Water may not have the same healthy effect as original Saluda Natural Spring Water. In conclusion, the argument is not logically convincing. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide additional evidence to support his or her conclusion.

Analytical Writing Assessment: Practice 01 The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company: "When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees." 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 explanations 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. My response: The author stated that the Apogee Company was more profitable when it operated in one location. Thus, the author concluded that the Apogee Company would make more profit by conduct all its operations from a single location. However, I don't think the author's argument is reasonably sound. First of all, the author failed to consider other factors that may influence the profit of the Apogee Company. In fact, the possible reasons that the Apogee Company made more profit in the past can be the good economic, cheap labor cost and less market competition. In addition, the past success can not guarantee the future success. Even if centralization actually counted for the better profitability in the past, it doesn’t mean that the Apogee Company will definitely make more profit by applying the same policy. Last and not least, without carefully evaluation, such centralization may even worsen profitability by increasing costs. For example, if the Apogee Company sells products all over the world, centralization would increase transportation costs. In conclusion, the author’s argument was lack of sufficient considerations, thus the expected result may not happen. The author should evaluate more carefully before he or she make the conclusion.

How long does it take you to go to a movie theater? I saw THOR 3 with a friend and he told me he hasn't gone to a movie theater for years! Because he has to drive almost 2 hours to get to the nearest one. It only takes me 5 minutes walk to go to one...I guess maybe that's why I see movies so often.