【Big Fish】03月24日Argument203-By topran

topranUID: 2310216

TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.

"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
WORDS: 448
TIME: 00:57:06
DATE: 2010/3/24 21:47:28

In this argument, the author got the conclusion that smaller and nonprofit hospital was better than larger and for-profit hospital. To justify this conclusion, the author used a case study between the small and nonprofit hospital in Saluda and large, profit hospital in Megaville. As the evidence which used by author rests on a series of dubious assumptions, we can't rashly got the conclusion that large and for-profit hospital was weak in economical and quality aspects.

In the first place, the conclusion relies in the unsubstantiated assumption that these two hospitals were comparable. Due to the different location, it is highly possible that the gap between data weren't cause by the different of scale and purpose of hospital but by the reign distinction. Perhaps, in Saluda, patients only stay one day for treatment in the large, for-profit hospital and the cure rate can be much better than in the small and nonprofit hospital. So as in Megaville. Without ruling out this possibility, the compare case study wasn't credible and convincible.

Even if we assume that different about location can be neglect, still, the compare study was questionable. Besides location , were there other different between two hospitals ? Of course yes. Maybe the small, nonprofit hospital was just a common community hospital to treat some regular illness, but the large and for-profit hospital was specialized in tread tough and serious diseases like cancer and tumor. Thus, under this circumstance, the cure rate was incomparable between two hospitals. Since the author fail to consider other alternative explanation for difference of data, we can't rely on this to draw any firm conclusion.

In the third place, even if we trust the case study, the conclusion is still up in the air. Just based on the cure rate, average length of patient's stay in hospital and the number of employee to serve each patient, we can't know the small and nonprofit hospital do provide better service. The author might make an cause- effect false here. Admittedly, these three aspects do contribute a lot to the quality for any hospital, however , to evaluate the quality of a hospital is not a simple case, we need to consider many other aspects as well, such as the attitude of nurses and doctors, the standard of equipment and so on. So just based on the existing data, we can't say that large and for-profit hospital wasn’t good enough.

In sum, the argument is dubious at best. Before I can accept this conclusion, the author must provide better evident to show that the case study is reliable and the two hospital is comparable. What's more, the author should consider more aspect to evaluate the quality of hospitals.

cooltozeroUID: 2705603

组长，我来看了一下~~学习，然后顺便拍一下啦！

错误  探讨及建议 精彩


In this argument, the author got（用一般现在时比较好吧） the conclusion that smaller and nonprofit hospital （复数吧）was better than larger and for-profit hospital. To justify this conclusion, the author used a case study（个人感觉不太准确，不如说是一个比较吧？） between the small and nonprofit hospital in Saluda and large, profit hospital in Megaville. As the evidence which（可不要这个which了） used by author rests on a series of dubious assumptions, we can't rashly got the conclusion that large and for-profit hospital（） was weak in economical（什么意思呢，没这个用法吧？） and quality aspects.（开头指出结论，简要提了论据，以及指出逻辑错误，开头值得肯定）

In the first place, the conclusion relies in the unsubstantiated assumption that these two hospitals were comparable（我觉得这个主题句有问题，两个医院本身就性质不一样，条件不一样，才拿来比较他们的质量的，你这里又说不可比，到底是个什么意思呢？这个题目没有错误类比这个逻辑错误。通常错误类比出现在那种：把一种政策不加比较地移到另一个地方的时候，才会犯）. Due to the different location, it is highly possible that the gap between data weren't cause by the（X) different of scale and purpose of hospital but by the reign distinction（这个没展开，没说清楚）. Perhaps, in Saluda, patients only stay one day for treatment in the large, for-profit hospital and the cure rate can be much better than in the small and nonprofit hospital（没懂）. So as in Megaville. Without ruling out this possibility（你这段里面没有提到possibility呀？）, the compare case study wasn't credible and convincible（“比较”不可信，应该是说比较得出的结果不可信吧？而且你没提出从这个比较当中到底作者拿出了什么结论）.

Even if we assume that different about location can be neglect, still, the compare（compare只有动词的意思，它和study联不上） study was questionable. Besides location , were there other different between two hospitals （又在开始讲差异了？你的上一段不就主要讲这个问题了么？）? Of course yes. Maybe the small, nonprofit hospital was just a common community hospital to treat some regular illness, but the large and for-profit hospital was specialized in tread tough and serious diseases like cancer and tumor. Thus, under this circumstance, the cure rate was incomparable between two hospitals. Since the author fail to consider other alternative explanation for difference of data, we can't rely on this to draw any firm conclusion.（我真的觉得这段和第一段没有本质上的差别。

In the third place, even if we trust the case study（？本题里面没有study）, the conclusion is still up in the air. Just based on the cure rate, average length of patient's stay in hospital and the number of employee to serve each patient, we can't know the small and nonprofit hospital do provide better service. The author might make an cause- effect false here. Admittedly, these three aspects do contribute a lot to the quality for any hospital, however , to evaluate the quality of a hospital is not a simple case, we need to consider many other aspects as well, such as the attitude of nurses and doctors, the standard of equipment and so on. So just based on the existing data, we can't say that large and for-profit hospital wasn’t good enough.

In sum, the argument is dubious at best. Before I can accept this conclusion, the author must provide better evident to show that the case study is reliable and the two hospital is comparable. What's more, the author should consider more aspect to evaluate the quality of hospitals.(我不拍结尾）



窃以为， 此篇逻辑上有些重要问题！
原文的逻辑是，三条论据（1，病人留院时间2 治愈率3 每个病人的医护人员数量）证明S 医院比M医院质量更好，并且更经济。 得到这个结论之后，再推广到：所有小型非盈利性医院都要比大型盈利医院更经济和有更好的医疗质量。

你说它们不可比，那本题有存在的意义么？
重要的是，证明它的三个论据是无法证明第一个小结论的，然后，再证明后一个推广，也是不成立的。
   本文中，你似乎没有注意到后面那一环结。

只是个人意见，请斟酌接纳··


另外，谢谢组长一切的帮助！！！以后还要有劳你的关照！！