argument167 求拍~

ginorUID: 2610959

虽然修改过~但觉得整篇都是生硬的模板~~请求指点一二~




题目：ARGUMENT167 - A folk remedy* for insomnia, the scent in lavender flowers, has now been proved effective. In a recent study, 30 volunteers with
chronic insomnia slept each night for three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room where their sleep was monitored. During the first week, volunteers continued to take their usual sleeping medication.

They slept soundly but wakened feeling tired. During the second week, the volunteers discontinued their medication. As a result, they slept less soundly than the previous week and felt even more tired. During the third week, the volunteers slept longer and more soundly than in the previous two weeks. This shows that over a short period of time lavender cures insomnia.

*A folk remedy is usually a plant-based form of treatment common to traditional forms of medicine, ones that developed before the advent of modern medical services and technology.








In this argument,the arguer projects that over a short period of time lavender cures insomnia.To support this assertion the author cites a recent study that 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia as sample use lavender-scented pillows and sleep in a controlled room lasted a three-week monitor.On the basis of this study the author infers that lavender can cures insomnia.For several respects,I am not convinced that the author's assertion is accurate.

To begin with,the author provide a sample lacks credibility,because 30 volunteers are too small in its size,which is not large enough to be available sample.In addition,the setting of control group is illogical,for the lacking another control group of insomniac who did not use lavender-scented to compare with the original group.Further more,the argument provides no details about these volunteers' health conditions before they used the lavender-scented.Lacking of these informations,the conclusion of the study is unpersuadable.

Another fundamental problem is that study cited a senseless data.The observation of the first week is the volunteers slept soundly but wakened feeling tired.However, the author does not exhibit any explanation about the phenomena why the volunteers feel so.Besides,the observation of the second week bases on that the volunteers discontinued their medication that can not prove any points of the author's assertion.Result in the volunteers slept less soundly and felt even more tired ,we can entirely to assume that using the lavender-scented pillows make no efficacy.Since we can find no concrete evidence to substantiate the inevitable relationship between lavender and insomnia, perhaps to ensure insomniac to have a enough sleep that they should continue their medication.

The argument also unfairly assumes that lavender cures insomnia by the insufficient evidence of the third week's observation.A threshold problem involve of the third week's oberservation is that the author does not provide complete information concerning the third week study's precondition and aftereffect in illustrating that the lavender-pillow have effect on insomnia.The author only informs us that the volunteers show when they slept,but what we care more is that if the volunteers continued their medication again?And how did they feel after they wakened,more tired or relax?For lacking such detailed informations,we can hardly convince the author's presumption.

Last but not least,since the author fails to give a clear definition of insomnia,thus I can not evaluate if sleeping soundly and longer is available informations.As we commonly accept,insomnia usually means people hard to fall asleep.Therefore, if insomnia is defined as whether people apt to drop asleep then insomnia is irrelevant to sleeping soundly and longer. In a word,without a clear definition of insomnia it is impossible to assess the strength of the study,let alone that the lavender can cures insomnia in a short time.

In sum, the author's assumption is unpersuasive as it stands. To evaluate the author's conclusion more efficiently,we would need more informations concerning a study of a large number of insomniac sample in its size and set available control group.To better assess the accuracy of the author's claim it would be useful to know the clear definition of insomnia and the precondition and aftereffect of the volunteers every week to ensure enough data of the study to compare.


====================================
贴上来时格式好像有点乱~~~劳烦各位看官了~！谢谢~！

cinderella1016UID: 2666652

你希望大家改模板咩？

你对自己负责任咩？

ginorUID: 2610959

请不要觉得我的反驳是不虚心接纳意见，

由于是第三篇argument的写作，对它的写作局限于一个套路

对于一问题展开论证，都会用这个结构：
主题句（指出存在的逻辑错误）+（指出作者得出这个问题结论所依赖的假设）+有推测或假设法列举影响结论的可能或该假设的不合理+（小让步指出作者结论某种程度的合理性）+转折做段落小结论

模板虽说是辅助的框架，但目前还是离不开。没了模板，那这篇东西恐怕剩没多少字了

您的意思是指把模板的话都去掉，别让人看这些没实质意义的文字就是负责？确实，要摆上来就不应该浪费别人的时间这个道理我晓得~！！您又知道我对自己不负责？不晓得您对“负责”这两字到底是何种定义

sakuraanneUID: 2253519

我的思路，你可以借鉴：
这个实验本身设计不够合理
实验结果不能说明那些人失眠被治愈
即使被治愈了也不说明是薰衣草的功效

pat lz，如果还有时间的话，现在稍微模板化一点也无妨，大家都是从有模板一步步走过来的。

sakuraanneUID: 2253519

无模板写作当然会说学习范文，但是如果觉得范文太高难度，可以参考这个板油的，虽然有缺点，但确实没有模板痕迹。可以随意一看。https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1026817&extra=

你的主要问题我认为是过于模板化，具体说来就是模板句子用的比例过高，平时大家用模板也就是几个起承转合句，你用模板句构造文章，而缺乏展开，没有说一些自己论证的例子，举出一些possibilities