1、shmilyqiqi 的 AA Tip：1. 我用的是 800 分大牛 tonyadidas 的 AA 模版，但根据实际经验，对各段稍作精简（把拗口的一些词、句式去掉） ，再排了序（挑出常考到的高频理由） 。2. AA 无需它法，只要把这些理由背熟！我复习 AWA 时间很少，但这些理由到现在还能脱口而出，靠平时上下班路上边想边背、反反复复背。3. 画线处为经典的段首、尾句式，请务必背熟、灵活运用！因为各段内容可以现编，也常常编的是废话反复说，但有了这样漂亮的段首、尾来保障结构，就安全多了。非常经典的开头、结尾看完题目就开始直接打这两段，边打边想理由！（经典）开头段模板 The conclusi
2、on endorsed in this argument is that. Several reasons are offered in support of this argument. First of all, the author points out that. In addition, the author reasons that (Whats more, he also assumes that ) At first glance, the authors argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further refle
3、ction reveals that the conclusion is based on some dubious assumptions and the reasoning is biased due to the inadequacy and partiality in the nature of evidence provided to justify the conclusion. A careful examination would review how groundless this conclusion is. （经典）结尾段模板 To conclude, this argu
4、ment is not persuasive as it stands. Accordingly, it is imprudent for the author to claim that. To make this argument logically acceptable, the author would have to show that. In addition, to solidify the conclusion, the author should provide concrete evidence as well to demonstrate that. Only with
5、more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal. （结尾中复述的理由就 copy/paste 开头中的理由）高频理由（按频率由高到低排列）时序性因果攻击 Firstly, the author is engaged in after this, therefore, because of this reasoning. The line of reasoning is that because A happened before B, the former caused
6、 the latter. However, this reasoning is fallacious unless other possible causal factors have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C. As a result, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of B must be based on a more thorough investigation to gather data in order to narrow down and
7、 locate the actual cause of B.同时性因果攻击 Secondly, the authors solution rests on the assumption that A is the cause of B just because A coincided with B. However, a mere positional correlation does not necessarily prove a causal relationship. In addition, all other prospective causes of B, such as C an
8、d D, must be ruled out. Without detailed analysis of the real source of B, it would be groundless to attribute B to A.错误类比攻击 Additionally, it is highly doubtful that strategies drawn from A are applicable to B. However, differences between these two clearly outweigh the similarities, therefore makin
9、g the analogy much less valid. For example, C and D all affect A but virtually absent in B. Accordingly, we can see that A and B are so dissimilar that B is unlikely to experience the same consequence if it adopts As strategies.非此即彼攻击 Last but not least, the author unfairly assumes that a reader mus
10、t make a either-or choice. However, the argument fails to rule out possibility that adjusting A and B might produce better results. Moreover, if the author is wrong in the assumption that A and B are the only causes of the problem, thus the most effective solution might include a complex of other fa
11、ctorssuch as C and D. In any event, the author provides no justification for the mutually exclusive choice imposed on the reader.必要性攻击 In the first place, the author unfairly assumes that B was determined solely by A. While A is a seemingly important element in determining B, it is hardly the only o
12、r even necessarily required element. This assumption overlooks other crucial criteria in determining Bsuch as C, D. Without accounting for these potential factors, the author concludes too hastily that is the best way to achieve goals.充分性攻击 In the second place, the authors solution rests on the assu
13、mption that A is sufficient to give birth to the desired goals. However, if it turns out that B is due to a combination of factors, some of which will remain unchanged in the future, such as C and D, only A might have no impact on B.选择性样本攻击 A threshold problem is that the author provides no evidence
14、 to claim that the general group as a whole is of the same characteristic. The example cited, while suggestive of this trend, is insufficient to warrant that the sample is representative of the whole group. For example, I question thatTherefore, such evidence would be obviously unrepresentative. In
15、fact, in face of such limited evidence, it is fallacious for the author to draw any conclusion at all. (与“选择性样本攻击”较类似) 样本代表性攻击 Moreover, a possible methodology problem in the argument is that it is of bias. The term so many is too vague to be statistically meaningful. It is very possible that worker
16、s who were more interested in the survey might be likely to respond to the questionnaire. Lacking in the information about the number of workers surveyed and the number of respondents, it is impossible to assess the validity of the survey. For instance, if 1000 workers were surveyed but only 10 resp
17、onded, the result should be highly suspect. Because the author fails to account for other interpretations, the survey would be useless in concluding that.其他理由 忽略他因攻击 Thirdly, the author has focused only on A. A more detailed analysis would reveal that other factors far outweigh the factor on which t
18、he author focuses. For example, C. Lacking a more comprehensive analysis of the causes, it is presumptuous for the author to claim that A solely determined B.因果倒置攻击 At last, it is possible that the author has confused cause with effect. Perhaps A was a response to B. Since the author fails to accoun
19、t for this possibility, the claim that is completely unwarranted.样本数量攻击 Another problem that seriously weakens the logic of this argument is that the survey cited is based on too small a sample to be reliable. Offered in support of the argument, the only evidence is that. Unless it can be shown that
20、 the sample is typical of all general group, the fact that is groundless to claim thatLoaded question 和诚实性攻击 Whats more, the methodology of the survey is problematic for two reasons. For one thing, we are not informed whether the survey provided only 3 alternatives. If it did, the respondents, who m
21、ight very well prefer another choice not provided in the survey, might be forced to give up their preferences. For another thing, we are not informed whether the survey responses were anonymous or confidential. The respondents might supply responses favored by their superiors who might conduct the s
22、urvey. Both events would lead this survey unreliable, let alone draw the conclusion that样本时效性攻击 Last but not least, another flaw that significantly undermines this argument is that the author neglects to indicate how recently the survey was actually conducted. When used to generally claim a particul
23、ar group, the samples should be close enough to support the generalization, in order to prevent historical changes from invalidating the generalization. All we know is that the survey is recently published. The less recent the survey itself, the less reliable the results to demonstrate that差异概念攻击 To
24、 begin with, we must establish the meaning of the vague concept A. If the term were synonymous with B, the evidence cited would strongly support the argument. However, A may be defined in other terms such as C and D. Accordingly, the author has drawn the conclusion too hastily due to the ignorance o
25、f other definitions of A.范围内推攻击 Whats more, the most egregious reasoning error in this argument is that the author uses evidence pertaining to a general group on the basis of a particular B. Even if the reasoning may be sound in general sense, the particular situation in which B is involved may not
26、be representative of the entire general group. It is possible that. If this is the case, the claim that is ill founded.不随时变攻击 Moreover, the author unfairly assumes that A will remain unchanged over the next decades. However, a mere recent one-year A is insufficient to claim that. Statistics from suc
27、h limited anecdotal evidence is not a good indicator for this trend. In addition, it is possible that in the future, this trend would greatly fluctuate or even reverse, then the adoption of the authors proposal might give birth to B, however, it might also have a negative impact on C1 and, in turns, C2. Admittedly, this argument would be even weaker and weaker each day as time goes by.
