Written by xiemeng2370 revised by 紫陌纤尘o0
TOPIC: ARGUMENT200 - Statistics collected from dentists indicate that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. This evidence suggests that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. Thus, dentists who advertise to attract patients should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients.
提纲：
主一：晕的多不能说明觉得疼：还有很多表现，比如哭，吐
主二：样本：可能这个调查里女的意志坚强，或者体质好
主三：结论有问题：1.女性可能是强大的潜在客户2.员工敏感！=病人不觉得疼
This article concludes that dentists should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients in order to attract patients. To support this recommendation, the author cites that statistics collected from dentists indicate that men are much more fainting than women while visiting the dentist and then concludes that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. However, this argument suffers a series of logical problems and critical flaws, and is therefore wholly unpersuasive.
To begin with, the author assumes the feeling of distress about having dental work could only represent from one symptom-faint. However, common sense informs me that there are myriad of other symptoms could also caused by distressed. Thus, it is possible that women do not fait while visiting the dentist, but they may cry or throw up. Thus, only the faint cannot simply represent they are whether distressed or not.
Moreover, even though in this statistics, men are really more sensitive than women, but the arguer fail to support the condition of the sample in this study, such as age, occupation and habitus. Perhaps, in this study, the men virtually more likely to faint no matter whether visit the dentist or not. It is also possible, for instance, that the characteristics and habitus of women are stronger than men in this study, so that even they feel more pain, they won't faint at all. Thus, how can the author arbitrarily assume that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are only based on this one study?
Finally, even thought the statistics indeed truly represent the author's assume, but the recommendation that dentists who advertise to attract patients should target the male consumer is also unreasonable. The study only represents the patients’ condition when visiting the dentist, but begs a pivotal problem. Can they affirm that all the patients who suffered dental disease are really visit dentists? Perhaps, a plethora of women do not visit the dentist for the reason that they fear and cannot suffer the pain. Thus, if the advertisement only focuses on the male consumers, dentists would lose the vast numbers of female consumers. Moreover, the author's further recommendation that dentists should emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients is still problematic. I cannot be convinced that the sensitivity of their staff could release the pain of their patients because they are different people. So, this advertisement also cannot attract patients for the same reason.
In conclusion, the argument cannot be taken seriously as it stands. To better this argument, the author should reaffirm that the statistics could really and exactly reflect the most of patients' feeling when visiting the dentist. Moreover, as an advertisement, it cannot ignore any potential consumers.
提纲：
主一：晕的多不能说明觉得疼：还有很多表现，比如哭，吐(你举出的哭和吐是指疼的表现还是晕的表现？有点儿乱)
主二：样本：可能这个调查里女的意志坚强，或者体质好（感觉这个理由有些牵强，按常理也是男的比较意志坚强；而且体制好坏可能说明的是恢复的快慢不能说明感到疼痛程度吧？）
主三：结论有问题：1.女性可能是强大的潜在客户（恩这个偶也想到了^-^)2.员工敏感！=病人不觉得疼(这个看你在下面如何说了)
看完提纲吧，感觉有些没抓住重点，偶先把偶的分析贴在这，仅供参考，还得看看版主改出来的是什么样子，一起学习下。还有偶的些困惑。然后再看你的文章，O(∩_∩)O~结论：(In order to attract patients) focus on the male
emphasize the effectiveness of anesthetic techniques and sensitivity of their staff 论据：.从牙医那里收集来的数据（隐含前提1）男性看牙医的人数与女性差不多
→
男性看牙医感到晕的人数是女性的三倍
→
男性在牙齿治疗时比女性更可能感到痛苦
（隐含前提1）论据→隐含前提2（男性比女性更害怕疼痛）→结论
辩驳的思路：
1.论据推不出前提
先论证论据的第一步推论不正确（隐含前提1不正确）
再论证即便是第一步推论正确也推不出第二步推论
再论证即便第二步推论正确也推不出隐含前提2（即distress≠pain）
2.即便前提成立也推不出结论
1-1 男性平均看牙医的人数比女性多的话，数据就没有说服力
1-2 晕可能是心理因素，男性对牙病感到更加紧张
1-3 让步（即便更痛苦）distress可能是因为机器工作的声音听着难受
2-1 吸引病人→目的是赢利+提高声誉→focus on men（认为男性比女性多），那么数据不成立
2-1 病人选择牙医肯定是以治疗水平作为准则的
*distress: 1. great pain, anxiety, or sorrow; acute physical or mental suffering.
韦氏解释
a : pain or suffering affecting the body, a bodily part, or the mind
b : a painful situation
*suffer: to undergo or feel pain or distress
困惑：关键是理解这两个词的含义，但是这两个本来就是同义词，我中有你，你中有我，这到底怎么理解？我是从麻醉技术那里推出作者指的distress就是pain，但是后面那个nervous是不是pain引起的，suffering是不是指pain就不好说了。
This article concludes that dentists should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients in order to attract patients. To support this recommendation, the author cites that statistics collected from dentists indicate that men are much more fainting than women while visiting the dentist and then concludes that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. However, this argument suffers a series of logical problems and critical flaws, and is therefore wholly unpersuasive.
偶标出来的都是模板吧~阿狗的开头一直很少有人去研究，我看到666版主的一个帖子是讲开头如何写的，大概思想是要体现逻辑链。虽然都是restate, 但是体现逻辑链的restate和简单的复述作者的陈述还是不一样的。逻辑链我决定起码应该是分清楚前提、结论、论据之间的关系，我觉得通常有两种关系：论据->前提->结论&基于前提下的论据->结论，这个题里边恰好这两种关系都有，这个就很纠结了— —。也有一版主说过，阿狗开头的最好境界是能简要地把逻辑错误都陈述出来，这个境界比较高。还是不建议用这种千篇一律的模板，因为除了单词，从这样的开头中不给给rater留下任何评价你的标准。
偶也在研究开头到底如何写，只是给你参考喽~~
To begin with, the author assumes (that) the feeling of distress about having dental work could only represent from(查了下goole.com没有找到这样的表达，通过…表现出present by) one symptom-faint. However, common sense informs me that there are myriad of (感觉这个无数用得有些夸张— —)other symptoms could also (be) caused by distressed. [这个逻辑混乱了，是根据faint来推出distress的，而不是因为distress所以faint] Thus, it is possible that women do not fait (faint) [题目说的是男性faint的比女性多，并没有说女性不faint] while visiting the dentist, but they may cry or throw up [不懂这个throw up要表达个什么意思]. Thus, only the faint cannot simply represent they are whether distressed or not.[中式！搭配不当，建议写成indict that they actually would distress]
Moreover, even though in this statistics, men are really more sensitive [让步的假设要建立在题目的基础上，题中可没说men比wowen更敏感] than women, but [even though...but语法错误] the arguer fail(s) to support [建议consider] the condition of the sample(s) in this study, such as age, occupation and habitus. [建议：fails to take the basic condition of the samples, such as agr, occupation and habitus, into consideration. PS. occupation 与faint有什么关系？即便有下文也应该叙述出来]Perhaps, in this study, the men virtually more likely to faint no matter whether visit the dentist or not. It is also possible, for instance, that the characteristics and habitus [这两词有些重复*habitus: the physical characteristics of a person] of women are stronger [这个表达有些问题，是人比较强壮，不是体质比较强壮，体质可以说好better] than men in this study, so that even they feel more pain, they won't faint at all. Thus, how can the author arbitrarily assume that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are only based on this one study? [有语法问题]
Finally, even thought the statistics indeed truly represent the author's assume (assumption), but [语法问题] the recommendation that dentists who advertise to attract patients should target the male consumer is also unreasonable. The study only represents the patients’ condition when visiting the dentist, but begs a pivotal problem (总觉得这么用怪怪的，表示核心问题没见过这种表述). Can they affirm that all the patients who suffered dental disease are really visit dentists? [比较中式]Perhaps, a plethora of [不熟悉的词建议还是慎用，这个表示过剩的，是个红宝词] women do not visit the dentist for the reason that they fear and cannot suffer [不能遭受疼痛？应该是不能忍受吧~endure] the pain. Thus, if the advertisement only focuses on the male consumers, dentists would lose the (去掉)vast numbers of female consumers. Moreover, the author's further [题目这两个提议是用and连接的，是并列关系不是递进关系]recommendation that dentists should emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients is still problematic. I cannot be convinced [这个可以用主动表达，如果一定要用被动，建议写成be persuaded by] that the sensitivity of their staff could release the pain of their patients because they are different people [这个理由又牵强又奇怪，感觉在说他们是“火星人”— —！即便要说反驳这个观点，也应该从这些人的技术等方面来吧，说他们是不同的人要是要表达他们各自的能力不同吧？]. So, this advertisement also cannot attract patients for the same reason [for what reason?].
In conclusion, the argument cannot be taken seriously as it stands. To better this argument, the author should reaffirm that the statistics could really and exactly reflect the most of patients' feeling when visiting the dentist. Moreover, as an advertisement, it cannot ignore any potential consumers.
上面主要是基于语言方面，现在整体说一下啊~ 先理一下你的结构： 第一段是restate
第二段主要是批驳faint不能表明distress，但是论证过程逻辑混乱。 第三段还是说不一定distress的问题，基于一个自己二次推理得出的让步，用alternative explains来论述。 第四段用一个让步承认假设（应该是指distress吧），接着用alternative explains 来批驳广告。提到了核心问题（ pivotal problem ）但事实上核心问题不在这里。 第五段结尾，作为总结全文的段落，提到的观点就应该是全文的核心观点。即是调查采集的数据部具有代表性，与第四段的核心问题出现分歧，造成逻辑混乱。 在下觉得LZ还是没有抓住核心的问题去批判，逻辑比较混乱，论证比较牵强。给你两个链接，希望对LZ有帮助。加油！ 666版主的：https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=963476&highlight=
另一同学的精华：https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=412534&highlight= 以上修改仅代表个人意见，如有不当，欢迎指正！ |
楼主: Maci.
发表于 2010-1-14 08:37:06
发表于 2010-1-19 01:07:24
签到领寄托币
GO
转发
