argument53

happylilywanUID: 2649768

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.

The arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth of infancy which even continues in later life. To strengthen this conclusion, the arguer cites a research data indicating that infants who have showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn when their mothers produced increasing melatonin. The arguer also provides a follow-up study which was done 13 years later after those infants had been studied showing that among those children, half of whom considered themselves as shy. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

To begin with, the argument claims that increased levels of melatonin before birth causes shyness during infancy, and automatically assumes that melatonin has a great effect on the infant's brain function rather than the mother's. However, this may not be the case. The arguer obviously overlooks other possible explanations for this phenomenon. For example, perhaps melatonin is the hormore which only has only influence on the mother. Without providing further information to prove that melatonin has a direct effect on the infants' brain function, I cannot accept the arguer's opinion.

Secondly, even assuming that melatonin definitely has impact on the infants' brain function, the arguer unfairly indicated a casual relation between mild distress and shyness. It is more likely to be a natural reaction to show mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as unusual oder or a tape recording of an unknown voice rather than shyness as the arguer states. For that matter, I cannot concede that mild distress and shyness are the same concepts.

Thirdly, the arguer makes a too fast thesis that the shyness of those infants are attributed to melantonin merely while according to the common sense characteristic is varied by many factors, not only the physical one. We cannot exclude the influence from the environment around the children. Since there is no confirming information in the argument about how these children perform in the later life--even when they become grown-ups, I will not concede myself to admit these infants will still be shy whatever the life has to offer in the later life.

To sum up, the arguer makes a conclusion that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness and during infancy and the shyness continues into later life. To bloster it, the arguer should provide further information convincing that melatonin influence the infants' brain function. Furthermore, the arguer should also give related scientific information to indicate mild distress is due to shyness, not the other emotions or simply physical reaction. To strengthen the argument, I'd better be convinced that these infants' characteristics are not influenced by other factors apart from the melatonin.