A 160 原131

huashiyiqikeUID: 2674177

160.As people grow older, an enzyme known as PEP increasingly breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in learning and memory. But now, researchers have found compounds that prevent PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart. In tests, these compounds almost completely restored lost memory in rats. The use of these compounds should be extended to students who have poor memory and difficulty in concentrating-and therefore serious problems in school performance. Science finally has a solution for problems neither parents nor teachers could solve.

随着人们的衰老，一种已知叫做PEP的酶不断地分解与学习和记忆有关的神经化学物质。但现在研究人员已经发现了一些阻止PEP分解神经化学键的化合物。在试验中，这些化合物几乎完全恢复了老鼠失去的记忆。这些化合物的使用可以扩展到那些记忆力较差和因注意力不能集中而在学习中存在严重问题的学生。科学最终能够解决家长和教师都无法解决的问题。

huashiyiqikeUID: 2674177

占楼

zhangxingyueUID: 2851383

欢迎大家给我提宝贵意见

In this analysis, the arguer attempts to convince us that, some certain compounds can be extened to used for treating the problems of students having poor memory and little concentration. The major acssumptions nuderlying the argument are that when people grow older, neuropeptide chemicals related to learning and memory are broden down by the increasing enzyme in human body known as PEP, and that after researchs mainly on rats of losing memory, scientists found the compounds that are counterpart of PEP, preventing neuropeptide from being broken apart. The evidence presented throughout the argument, however, is unreliable and hence does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims.

First, the argument is based on a false in theory applyment. The speaker argues that when people grow older, the certain enzyme in human increases to break apart the learning and memory related chemicals, however, when it comes to students, who are most young in their age, the problems of theirs are not necessorily also resulted from the broken down of neuropeptide causing by PEP, the speaker unfairly apply the theory into the solving of memory and concentration problems. So even if the theory itselt proved true that PEP does cause memory lose and learning problems because of neuropeptide breaking down, it  does not mean compounds preventing the fountion of PEP can help students in the problems of memory and concentration.

Second, the arguer fails to prove that those compounds referred in the analysis have the capacity of treating human memory  and learning problems. Even if those compounds have been proved to restoration of lost of memory of rats, of which we have no access to know in what way the rats' memory are tested, it does not follow that if the same thing will happen in human. As we all know, there is much difference between the spiece of human and that of rat, not to mention the huge diversity exists between the brains of human's and rat's, according which, we should not take rats as the objects in the researches concentrating on the issue of memory and learning problems.In addition,the speaker commits a fallacy of classifying concenstration ability as the learning one. The speaker refers that, neuropeptide is the compounds related to learning and memory, but at the end of the analysis, the speaker asserts those compounds can be improved to treat the students of poor memory and concentration. There is no guarantee that solving of learning problems necessarily get the concentration problems solved, as commen sense tell us that learning and concentration are just two issues may cover some same aspects, rather than the totally same issue.

To conclude, the argument is not persuasive as it stands because the evidence cited on the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make it more logical, the arguer should present more facts to prove that the those compounds which prevents the PEP from broking down neuropeptide does have their effect on human. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding that students' problems of poor memory and concentration does caused by the dificiency of neuropeptide.

zhangxingyueUID: 2851383

对不起， 上一篇我忘记改正拼写错误了  看这篇吧


In this analysis, the arguer attempts to convince us that, some certain compounds can be extended to used for treating the problems of students having poor memory and little concentration. The major assumptions uderlying the argument are that when people grow older, neuropeptide chemicals related to learning and memory are broken down by the increasing enzyme in human body known as PEP, and that after researches mainly on rats of losing memory, scientists found the compounds that are counterpart of PEP, preventing neuropeptide from being broken apart. The evidence presented throughout the argument, however, is unreliable and hence does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims.

First, the argument is based on a false in theory applying. The speaker argues that when people grow older, the certain enzyme in human increases to break apart the learning and memory related chemicals, however, when it comes to students, who are most young in their age, the problems of theirs are not necessarily also resulted from the broken down of neuropeptide causing by PEP, the speaker unfairly apply the theory into the solving of memory and concentration problems. So even if the theory itself proved true that PEP does cause memory lose and learning problems because of neuropeptide breaking down, it
does not mean compounds preventing the function of PEP can help students in the problems of memory and concentration.

Second, the arguer fails to prove that those compounds referred in the analysis have the capacity of treating human memory and learning problems. Even if those compounds have been proved to restoration of lost of memory of rats, of which we have no access to know in what way the rats' memory are tested, it does not follow that if the same thing will happen in human. As we all know, there is much difference between the spice of human and that of rat, not to mention the huge diversity exists between the brains of human's and rat's, according which, we should not take rats as the objects in the researches concentrating on the issue of memory and learning problems. In addition, the speaker commits a fallacy of classifying concentration ability as the learning one. The speaker refers that, neuropeptide is the compounds related to learning and memory, but at the end of the analysis, the speaker asserts those compounds can be improved to treat the students of poor memory and concentration. There is no guarantee that solving of learning problems necessarily get the concentration problems solved, as common sense tell us that learning and concentration are just two issues may cover some same aspects, rather than the totally same issue.

To conclude, the argument is not persuasive as it stands because the evidence cited on the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make it more logical, the arguer should present more facts to prove that those compounds which prevents the PEP from broking down neuropeptide does have their effect on human. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding that students' problems of poor memory and concentration does caused by the deficiency of neuropeptide.