[ineffable] 第九次作业 Argument76 -by xiaxiaobing

xiaxiaobing919UID: 2606450

76The following appeared as part of an article in a health and beauty magazine.

"A group of volunteers participated in a study of consumer responses to the new Luxess face cream. Every morning for a month, they washed their faces with mild soap and then applied Luxess. At the end of that month, most volunteers reported a marked improvement in the way their skin looked and felt. Thus it appears that Luxess is truly effective in improving the condition of facial skin."



The article concludes that Luxess is truly effective in improving the condition of facial skin. This conclusion is based on a study that many participants feel good about their facial skins after the continuing use of mild soap and Luxess for one month. This argument is not logically persuasive, however, because it relies on numerous shaky assumptions for which no evidence has been given.

To begin with, the author provides no specific information of the group of participants, which would not be representative. For example, the participants may totally consist of old ladies, whose skin has a lot of space to be improved. And furthermore, these people would not used to protect their skins, so that the usage of cream does exert a great impact on their skins. However, if applied to the young ladies who are using more advanced cream, this product would turn not to be so effective. Furthermore, without the test on male participants, it is too hastily to generalize Luxess can be effective to improve the condition of all skin types.

Furthermore, the process of this study is not reliable, because no control group has been provided. As mentioned by the speaker, the respondents washed their faces with mild soap and then applied Luxess. Without the data of groups of people who just washed their faces with the same kind of mild soap only, the author cannot convince me that the improvement is totally caused by the Luxess. Furthermore, without the comparison to other products, we cannot evaluate whether other products would be much more effective than Luxess. In this case, the study is not sufficient to prove this product can make an efficient improvement to the facial skin.

Finally, the improvement is reported by the participants, which is very subjective. Without professional test of the condition of these skins, the real improvement is open to doubt. Moreover, only looking and feeling better cannot necessarily indicate the skin has been improved, because there might be some side-effect that has neglected by us. In addition, the author affords no evidence how these people feel one month later, if their facial conditions get no improvement or even worse, we will consider the real effect of Luxess.

In conclusion, this argument is logically unsound. If the author could demonstrate that the respondents are representative, that the facial skin do make an improvement without severe side-effect, and that the improvement is really caused by Luxess rather than the mild soap, this argument would be much stronger. Without the additional information, however, we will be wary about accepting the argument's conclusion.