|
|
此文章由 tianya168 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 tianya168 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整
本帖最后由 tianya168 于 2023-3-15 18:18 编辑
据说ChatGPT 4做美国法学院的入学考试LSAT都能拿88 percentile。我果断用ChatGPT4试了下LAT sample paper...........
原题： https://lat.acer.edu.au/files/La ... or_Website_2022.pdf
以下是ChatGPT4对第一题的作答：
Analysis of the Letter to the Canary Beach Shire Council
Introduction:
The letter, written by Brian Levitt, a local business owner, opposes the Canary Beach Shire Council's proposal to ban alcohol and live music in public parks during Schoolies week. The author makes several arguments against the ban, highlighting the economic impact on local businesses, the need for a safer alternative, and the potential violation of business owners' legal rights. This analysis will critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these arguments and assess their persuasiveness.
Argument 1: Economic Impact on Local Businesses
Strength: Brian Levitt presents a strong argument by highlighting the negative economic consequences of the ban for local businesses. He provides an example of the Australia Day drinking ban and argues that it only hurt local businesses without actually preventing partying. He also claims that the proposed ban would lead to increased policing costs, which would further strain the town's economy.
Weakness: However, the author fails to provide concrete evidence or data to support his claims about the economic impact of the ban. Additionally, he does not consider the potential benefits of the ban, such as reduced costs related to property damage or healthcare associated with excessive drinking and accidents during Schoolies week.
Argument 2: Violation of Business Owners' Legal Rights
Strength: The author contends that the proposed ban infringes on the legal rights of business owners, such as himself, who should be allowed to rent out their properties to whomever they choose. This argument appeals to the sense of fairness and the notion of property rights, which may resonate with readers.
Weakness: However, the author does not provide any specific legal framework or precedent that supports this claim. Moreover, it is unclear if the proposed ban actually prevents business owners from renting out their properties or if it merely limits certain activities within public spaces.
Argument 3: The Need for a Safer Alternative
Strength: The author proposes an alternative solution that involves organizing a regulated Schoolies event, which could mitigate potential dangers and promote a safe environment for the young adults. This alternative showcases the author's willingness to find a compromise and address the concerns of both sides, which may be persuasive to readers.
Weakness: Despite suggesting a potentially viable alternative, the author does not offer a detailed plan for the implementation of such an event. Moreover, some of the proposed activities, such as a beauty pageant, may not be universally appealing and might be perceived as outdated or even discriminatory.
Conclusion:
Overall, Brian Levitt's letter presents several arguments against the proposed ban on alcohol and live music during Schoolies week in Canary Beach. While he raises valid concerns regarding the economic impact on local businesses and the need for a safer alternative, the author's arguments could be strengthened by providing more concrete evidence, data, and a more detailed plan for the proposed alternative. Additionally, addressing potential benefits of the ban and presenting a more comprehensive legal framework to support the claim of infringement on business owners' rights would help bolster his position. In its current state, the letter may persuade some readers, but it may not be entirely convincing without further substantiation of the claims.
看完后觉得............ ChatGPT 4的知识水平很高，应该已经超出了高中生的程度。
结构工整，论点清晰就不说了。 Weakness部分的分析有些让我震惊了，特别是 “beauty pageant, may not be universally appealing and might be perceived as outdated or even discriminatory”，很敏感，很会找重点。
|
|
如诗如梦新西兰 (2009-1-14) tonyy 
上海---我的弄堂情结 (2011-7-31) JerryWu 
楼主:七公主
发表于 2023-3-15 10:26
