Argument53 by wcnk 求拍

wcnkUID: 2546550

TOPIC: ARGUMENT53 - Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin-a hormone known to affect some brain functions-would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children-now teenagers-who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life

1.同时发生因果
2.前后因果
3.“刺激”是否合理？数量太少
4.“shy”定义有误(这一点后来加上的)



两方面希望得到指点：
1.逻辑上是否攻击的有力？如果有问题是攻击点选的不好，还是批驳论述无力？
2.语言上是否罗嗦，尤其在开头部分，各段重述题目观点是不是有罗嗦现象？
谢谢各位，有拍必回~~

In this argument, the arguer make a conclusion that increased levels of melatonin (M for short) before birth cause shyness during infancy and it would continue into later life. In supporting the conclusion, the arguer offers us a survey which has two parts. One is investigated thirteen years ago, the other part is a follow-up study conducted earlier this year. The arguer's claim seems reasonable at the first sight, but after extensional analysis, some problems may appear.

First, the arguer falsely make a causal relationship between shyness of infants and the increase of M based on the survey investigated thirteen years ago. The most important problem is the underlying assumption that it is the increase of M during pregnancy that results in shyness of infants. The arguer only points out that the two events occurred during the same period of time. However, merely a coincidence of two events could not sufficiently demonstrate a causal relationship between them. Many other reasons may also lead to the shyness of an infant such as genetic factor.

Besides, the arguer make an assumption that this shyness continues into later life because of the increase of M based on the follow-up study. The assumption is based on the mere fact that the shyness of teenagers occurred after the increase of M during pregnancy. However the sequence of the two events, itself, does not sufficiently prove that the former caused the later one. There are many other factors such as living circumstances and temper of relatives may also lead to shyness of these teenagers.

Moreover, the survey investigated thirteen years ago may also be suspicious. We cannot fully draw the conclusion that these infants are shy through the signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. The arguer fails to offer us the detail about the stimuli. Maybe it was a thrill sound or a smelly gas which is very strong that even adults--including shy type and out-going type-- would feel uncomfortable when exposed to it. What's more, the total number investigated of 25 could hardly illustrate the conclusion sound. The limited sample cannot make us believe that it is M which leads to shyness.

In the last, the arguer fails to define the concept of "shy" correctly. In the follow-up study, half of these teenagers identified themselves as "shy", which cannot equal to the conclusion that they are actually shy, because whether a person is shy or not cannot be determined only by themselves, comment from other people around them is also needed. Merely base on the given study one cannot draw the conclusion.

In all, the arguer cannot make the conclusion hastily only on the survey given. More samples should be done and more investigations about the causal relationship between increases of M during pregnancy are needed.

mini137UID: 2711174

LZ正文第一段faulty用错了~~应该是使用副词falsely~~

mini137UID: 2711174

有一点也可以反驳，文中提到这些婴儿更可能在早秋被怀孕，但没有提供证据支持这种观点，文中未提高有多少婴儿是在早秋怀孕，从而无法推测是否是M较多，无法得出结论~

wcnkUID: 2546550

谢谢 mini137 的指正，faulty 是adj.falsely才对~~
另外我不认为婴儿可能在早秋被怀孕是一个点，因为survey调查的就是这个结果，有点无背景结论的意思，我觉得不好批
不过还是扩展了一下思路~~谢谢

桔子susanUID: 2754084

In this argument, the arguer make a conclusion that increased levels of melatonin (M for short) before birth cause shyness during infancy and it would continue into later life. In supporting the conclusion, the arguer offers us a survey which has two parts. One is investigated thirteen years ago, the other part is a follow-up study conducted earlier this year. The arguer's claim seems reasonable at the first sight, but after extensional analysis, some problems may appear.
First, the arguer faulty make a causal relationship between shyness of infants and the increase of M based on the survey investigated thirteen years ago. The most important problem is the underlying assumption that it is the increase of M during pregnancy that results in shyness of infants. The arguer only points out that the two events occurred during the same period of time. However, merely a coincidence of two events could not sufficiently demonstrate a causal relationship between them. （好吧，我认为这里还是有些罗唆了，四句都在说shyness和M的增加不一定有关系，只是时间重叠。其实后面列举其它原因倒是可以稍微详细一点） Many other reasons may also lead to the shyness of an infant such as genetic factor.
Besides, the arguer make an assumption that this shyness continues into later life because of the increase of M based on the follow-up study. The assumption is based on the mere fact that the shyness of teenagers occurred after the increase of M during pregnancy. （这一句和你的ts句有重复了）However the sequence of the two events, itself, does not sufficiently prove that the former caused the later one. There are many other factors such as living circumstances and temper of relatives may also lead to shyness of these teenagers.（这一段TS你要说明的是即使幼儿时期shy，以后也不一定shy。但你的论证单单列举了有其它原因可以导致shyness of these teenagers，论述不充分。 我想表述为，引起shyness的原因有很多，如果以后到其它的环境中。。。性格可能会发生改变，即使幼儿shy以后也不一定会shy更好。）

Moreover, the survey investigated thirteen years ago may also be suspicious. We cannot fully draw the conclusion that these infants are shy through the signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. The arguer fails to offer us the detail about the stimuli. Maybe it was a thrill sound or a smelly gas which is very strong that even adults--including shy type and out-going type-- would feel uncomfortable when exposed to it.（这里其实和你的下一段都在说得有些重复，那就是作者把shy理解错了，只是一个是婴儿时期，一个是少年时期） What's more, the total number investigated of 25 could hardly illustrate the conclusion sound. The limited sample cannot make us believe that it is M which leads to shyness.
In the last, the arguer fails to define the concept of "shy" correctly. In the follow-up study, half of these teenagers identified themselves as "shy", which cannot equal to the conclusion that they are actually shy, because whether a person is shy or not cannot be determined only by themselves, comment from other people around them is also needed. Merely base on the given study one cannot draw the conclusion.
In all, the arguer cannot make the conclusion hastily only on the survey given. More samples should be done and more investigations about the causal relationship between increases of M during pregnancy are needed.

其实主要逻辑错误都找出来了，但是段落与段落之间的关系我认为还有点不清晰。这一篇高频逻辑推断我还是有点混乱，作者通过13年前的study（25个婴儿对一些DD有mild distress 的表现，这些婴儿更可能在早秋被怀上，而此时母亲体内有M）与 follow up study（这些婴儿成为青少年后，有一半人以上shown signs of distress），推出是M 引起了幼儿时期的害羞，并且在以后也会害羞）。如果是我，我想分为三点讲
1.这个study 有问题（（1）只有25个样本，太小。（2）超过一半的人show distress，具体是多少51%也是一半，这样就说明不了问题）
2.初秋时母亲体内有更多的M并不能推出这与婴儿时期的shy有关（（1）婴儿的那些表现不一定是shy的表现。（2）即使是，也有其它的原因）
3.即M使婴儿时期表现出shy，也不能断定这种shy会延续到以后（（1）show distress不一定是shy;(2)后来造成shy的原因可能有其它原因（环境等等）

呵呵，暂时就想到了这些，也不知对不对。