Argument53 求猛拍~有拍必回~下周考试~

407165437UID: 2784107

题目：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.
字数：528
用时：00:45:00
日期：2010-3-4 21:25:15

In the article the author asserts that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life. To support the conclusion, the author provides the evidence:1)a group of 25 infants who become signs of mild distress when is influenced by uncommon stimuli are more likely to have been conceived in early autumn;2)a hormone( melatonin) is negative correlation with the daylight; and 3)after these infants growing more than half of them consider themselves to be shy. A close scrutiny of the article reveals several aspects, which renders it suspect.
First of all, the author generalizes the relationship between melatonin and shyness in infants too hastily. According to the author's claim, increasing melatonin will automatically result in the shyness. Yet no sufficient evidence offered by the arguer is provided. The evidence cited, while suggestive in trends, is unpersuasive to warrant its truth because there is no reason to believe that shyness during infancy will occur automatically. For instance, the group of infants may become shy just for the reason that they receive an uncommon stimuli, which also has a strong and deeply influence in their later life, but not increasing melatonin. For that matter, there is no guarantee of high levels melatonin will lead infants to be shy.
Moreover, the author commits a fallacy of "Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc" in assuming that melatonin is the result of the change of daylight and then will have a certain effect in infants. However, the author does not provide insufficient evidence to substantiate it. Even if the melatonin has a negative correlation with the daylight in early autumn, it is the very one of indicators of the conclusion, and does not necessarily the only one, which makes that the claim is unpersuasive to warrant the conclusion. Perhaps the phenomenon is just an accidently occurrence and there might be some other increase substances, such as other hormone, biological elements and physical elements. but the arguer unfairly draws the claim that melatonin is mainly outstanding which is groundless. Without proving or even considering the other possibility and explanation, I would suspend my judgment about the reliable of the conclusion which is concluded hastily.
Finally, the author ignores other factors may take a significant influence on one's life. Without justification of external elements, the conclusion that melatonin results in shyness in infancy is groundless. The author assumes that the background conditions that this group of infants are the same at different time location and family. It is, however, not clear in this argument whether the current conditions in the group of children are the same as they grow up in different family and social environment. Thus, it is impossible to claim that only melatonin leads to shyness. Simply put, lack the evidence of mentioned above, the author's conclusion is unconvincing until providing detailed information.
In short, the author fails to validate the conclusion. To solidify the argument, the arguer should provide more concrete evidence to prove that children's shyness results from merely melatonin. In addition, the arguer would have t o rule out the possibilities mentioned above. Only in this way will the arguer convince me the conclusion.