紧急紧急 求批改 8月4号考试 A200

686jdUID: 2793857

This argument concludes that dentists’ advertisement should target male patients based on the statistics collected from dentists. At first glance, this argument might be somehow reasonable, but further consideration reveals that it contains several logical flaws and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the validity of the statistics is doubtful. The number of the men who faint is not representative of that majority of men faint. Perhaps the number of the men is larger than the women, thus the three times more men’s fainting is not persuasive. Nor can we get to know [url=]the methodology of the statistics.[/url]Unless the speaker can substantiate this assumption, he cannot justifiable rely on these statistics to draw any general inferences about dental patients.

Secondly, the author even assumes that the faint of man is due to they are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done. Yet the argument provides no evidence dearly establishing this causal relationship. Perhaps on average men suffer from more painful dental problems than women, for instance, men came to the
dentist's clinics to extract their wisdom teeth while the women came to wash teeth, explaining why more men than women faint at dental offices. Without ruling out this and other alternative explanations/ possibilities, the cause-and-effect is highly suspect.

Another problem with the argument is that the speaker provides no indication that the proposed advertisement will achieve its goal. It is equally likely that women are the major patients of the dentists. Or perhaps the advertising technique will have an opposite effect---by drawing attention to the very kind of pictures that cause distress and fainting. Thus, whether the advertisement of a dentist has significant influence on the patients is problematic.

Besides, even if I concede that men covers a large proportion of the patient, mere fact reveals that both the effectiveness of anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients are crucial when they choose the dentist’s clinic. Perhaps the factors men care about are the technology of the dentist, the price and the environment of the clinic. Hence, without taking into account these possibilities, the author cannot persuade me that it is essential to improve the effectiveness of anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients.

To sum up, the argument rests on an untenable statistics and makes an unreasonable conclusion. To strengthen it, the author should provide more information about how many men and women been surveyed and the true reasons of men’s faint. Careful conclusion should also take other factors into account including what patients mostly care about and the advertising techniques would in fact achieve their intended result.