|
感觉好多重复用语，好多 it is entirely/quite possible
perhaps…之类
另，请教大家。模板化还是能看出来的，会不会被判抄袭啊？
Argument 203
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.
In this argument, the arguer attempts to approve that smaller, nonprofit hospital has a better quality and can save more money than larger, for-profit ones. In support of the claim, the author cites the example of two separate hospitals
in Saluda and Megaville by comparing these two hospitals- one is smaller and non-profit, the other one is larger and profit- in several aspects, At the first glance, the argument seems to be reasonable, however, further reflections reveal the argument suffers from several fallacies.
The threshold problem with the argument is that the author unfairly assumes the days that the average patient stay in the hospital would reveal the quality of hospital. It is entirely possible that patients who go to a smaller and non-profit hospital tend to get A mild desease. Thus, they could recover easily and leave the hospital earlier than the patients who go to the larger hospital. Lacking information about the situation of the patients in both of the hospitals, the author's assumption is unconvincing.
Another fundamental problem that might undermine the argument is that the author correlates the number of employees per patient with the quality of the hospital. However, no substantiate evidence could prove the more employees per patient, the higher quality the hospital has. Perhaps, Perhaps, just because the hospital could not cure patients effectively, it needs more employees to treat a sick person. The large number of employees is just the reflection of inefficient work.
Moreover, few complaints dose not necessarily equates to the content of the patients. It is quite possible that the number of patients who go to the smaller and non-profit hospital is relatively small, and they do not require this kind of hospital to be very effective because the hospitals are non-profit. Without considering other more important factors that determining the quality of a hospital such as the competence of the employees, the author cannot simply rely on the number of employees to draw any conclusion about the quality of care
Last but not least, the author draws a hasty conclusion through only two hospitals. Even the author's claim about the hospitals in Saluda and Megaville is correct; only two hospitals could not be representative of all of these two kinds of hospitals. Perhaps, the results of hospitals in other areas are opposite. Providing no more information and investigation about a more significant number of hospitals, the author's conclusion is unjustifiable.
To sum up, the argument's conclusion is not well-reasoned because the example it cites does not lend strong credence to it. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should present more information about the quality of these two hospitals, and investigate a significant number of samples. | 
发表于 2010-4-4 16:37:57
签到领寄托币
GO
转发
