argument72-超越自我小组

啊拉UID: 2527432

题目：ARGUMENT72 - In measuring electrical activity in different parts of the brain, researchers found that people who describe themselves as generally happy have more activity in the left prefrontal lobe of their brains than do other people. Therefore, a medication for stimulating the left prefrontal lobe of the brain would be an effective treatment for clinical depression.
字数：436          用时：00:40:26          日期：2008-8-21 17:14:02

In this argument, the author suggests that a medication for stimulating the left prefrontal lobe (LPL) of the brain would be an effective treatment for clinical depression. However, this assertion seems to be ridiculous, for I can find some logical problems in this argument.

First of all, the conclusion author makes is based on the author’s view that to be happy can cure those patients who get the clinical depression. But he/she fails to prove it. As we all knows the depression is caused by many factors. Divorce, parent’s death or the bad mental situation can all cause one to be depression. Only a short-time stimulating cannot make a person feel happy in long time. So perhaps the medication can only help the patient feel happy in a very short time, in another words, the medication may not cure the depression.

Even if we concede that to be happier can treat the clinical depression, the conclusion that stimulating the LPL can treat the clinical depression is still unconvincing. The author gives an example to show those people who are happy have more activity in LPL, but it cannot prove that stimulating the LPL can make people happy. Perhaps the activity in LPL is only a response to the happy mood, so stimulating the LPL cannot make people happy. Or it is possible that stimulating the LPL can even make people feel depression so it is impossible to use this medication in treating the clinical depression. Actually, the author cannot ensure that stimulating is an effective way. Some organs in our body will be negative in response to the stimulating. That is to say, maybe LPL will not be active after stimulating; it may be calm down or even no response to the stimulating. Therefore, the author cannot prove that stimulating the LPL can make people happy, so he/she also cannot says that same way can help treat the clinical depression.

Finally, the measure mentioned above is problematic. Those who describe themselves as generally happy may not be real happy. Actually, experience and common sense tells me that the standard of being happy is complex. It is highly possible that these people take part in the study are only feel excited, and they misunderstand the excited to happy. So it is highly possible that stimulating the LPL may cause the patients who get clinical depression feel excited, but not happy. Their depression may be aggravating after the medication because they do not like to be excited.

In sum, the author’s conclusion is not convincing. I suggest him/her to reconsider about the whole conclusion after reading my argument.