驳论文通常由三种段落组成:
1)引入段(Introductory paragraph);
2)主体段(Body para-graph);
3)结尾段(Conclusion paragraph)。引入段是文章的导言。作者往往在导言中点明文章的主题或中心论点。在引入段,要提出文章的中心论点。在结尾段,驳论文要重申作者的观点，形成结论，以强调论证效果。主体段则采用“欲扬先抑,欲擒故纵”的方法,先承认对方的观点有一定的道理,然后笔锋陡转,批驳对方的片面观点,阐述反驳的理由。
In any academic area or professional field, it is just as important to recognize the limits of our knowledge and understanding as it is to acquire new facts and information.“
Personally, I hold that knowledge knows no bounds, therefore, on realizing this awkwardness, the only thing man should do is to absorb as much new knowledge as he can for the sake of not lagging behind the pacing steps of our world.
但是作者完全是从另外一个角度去论证，且看下文。
Does recognizing the limits of our knowledge and understanding serve us equally well as acquiring new facts and information, as the speaker asserts?注意这一句经典的反问式开头了，这是最引人注目的。While our everyday experience might lend credence to this assertion, further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with our Western view of how we acquire knowledge. Nevertheless,虽然是原则上不尽同意但还是提出妥协的办法，从而显出作者是critical thinking的，这一点很重要，也是拿分的重头戏也。a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.
让我们记一记一些好词好句：lend credence to this assertion (有足够的证据)证明这一观点的正确性;further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with…;Nevertheless, a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.
On the one hand, the speaker"s assertion accords with the everyday experience of working professionals. For example, the sort of "book”knowledge that medical, law, and business students acquire, no matter how extensive, is of little use unless these students also learn to accept the uncertainties and risks inherent in professional practice and in the business world.
Any successful doctor, lawyer, or entrepreneur would undoubtedly agree that new precedents and challenges in their fields compel them to acknowledge the limitations of their knowledge, and that learning to accommodate these limitations is just as important in their professional success as knowledge itself.
在驳论的第一段，作者就举例子说明知识的有限性并不一定意味着各行各业的人就必须汲取其他方面的知识，恰恰相反，对于医生、律师或企业家来说意识到了自我知识的有限，并且寻求方法去适应调和这一有限性反而是必要的。
Moreover, the additional knowledge we gain by collecting more information often diminishes-sometimes to the point where marginal gains turn to marginal losses. Consider, for instance, the collection of financial- investment information. No amount of knowledge can eliminate the uncertainty and risk inherent in financial investing. Also, information overload can result in confusion, which in turn can diminish one"s ability to assimilate information and apply it usefully. Thus, by recognizing the limits of their knowledge, and by accounting for those limits when making decisions, investment advisors can more effectively serve their clients.
作者进一步通过金融投资业信息的赘余的危害性来驳斥原文的观点。
On the other hand, the speaker"s assertion seems self-contradictory, for how can we know the limits of our knowledge until we"ve thoroughly tested those limits through exhaustive empirical observation--that is, by acquiring facts and information. For example, it would be tempting to concede that we can never understand the basic forces that govern all matter in the universe. Yet due to increasingly precise and extensive fact- finding efforts of scientists, we might now be within striking distance of understanding the key laws by which all physical matter behaves. Put another way, the speaker"s assertion flies in the face of悍然不顾，公然违抗the scientific method, whose fundamental tenet is that we humans can truly know only that which we observe. Thus Francis Bacon, who first formulated the method, might assert that the speaker is fundamentally incorrect.
说实话，我觉得这一段里，作者玩了一个诡辩的小伎俩：先是指出原文观点的自相矛盾性，然后引出自己的看法——认识论远重要于获取新的事实和信息，也就是要“先认识知识和理解力的局限然后才是摄取新知。”
How can we reconcile our experience in everyday endeavors with the basic assumption underlying the scientific method? Perhaps the answer lies in a distinction between two types of knowledge--one which amounts to a mere collection of observations (i.e., facts and information), the other which is deeper and includes a realization of principles and truths underlying those observations. At this deeper level "knowledge" equals "under- standing": how we interpret, make sense of, and find meaning in the information we collect by way of observation.
作者就上一段提出的问题推出自己的解决方法，即认识到“知识”分成两种：纯观察行为所得的信息;萃取之后的经过自己消化后的“理解”。但我觉得这里还有待发挥，估计是时间不够了，仓促间收笔吧。没有很好的说明白。
In the final analysis, evaluating the speaker"s assertion requires that we define "knowledge,"which in turn requires that we address complex epistemological issues best left to philosophers and theologians. Yet perhaps this is the speaker"s point: that we can never truly know either ourselves or the world, and that by recognizing this limitation we set ourselves free to accomplish what no amount of mere information could ever permit.
最后一句玩了复杂句的构句技巧，想搏ets一笑。但我觉得还是总结的不够好，没有说到点子上。其实，我们平实的写作大可不必如此玩弄文字，因为如果当别人都不知道你在说什么的话，一味专心于难句，无异于“喧宾夺主”了。个人认为，作者写得有点不知所云了。
范文：
The summer holiday is coming. Our class have a discussion about what to do during the holiday.
Some are in favor of staying at home. They think it’s both convenient and comfortable. What’s more, they can save money for other purposes. But they will lose the chance of getting to know the outside world. However, others prefer to go out for traveling since it can increase their knowledge and broaden their horizons. But they will spend more money and meet some difficulties while traveling.
In my opinion, it would be much better to stay at home, for I can do what I like, such as reading books, watching TV, and helping my parents with the housework.
Argument
本书共7章，结合ETS公示的GRE写作考试的题库，对于如何进行GRE立论文(Issue)和驳论文(Argument)的写作进行讲解，书中还提供了详细的英文论证语言、论据支持、文化历史背景以及名言警句。
