argu 51

civilppUID: 2999177

The author recommends that antibiotics should be used for healing patients who suffered from secondary infection after severe muscle strain. To support this recommendation the author cites the study in two researches that the recuperation of patients who used antibiotic was quicker than expected, while the recuperation of the second group the member of which took sugar pills instead was not apparently reduced. The author's argument suffers from a series of logical problems, and is therefore wholly unpersuasive.
To start with, the author's conclusion that antibiotic can benefit patients who suffered from secondary infections based on the assumption that the conditions and other factors of researches designed either by Dr. Newland or Dr. Alton remained the same . However, the author fails to provide evidence to support this assumption. Perhaps it is the warmer weather leaded to better healing of the patients treated by Dr. Newland rather than antibiotics did. Or it is possible that the patients of Dr. Alton suffered more severely than Dr. Newland's patients do. Without providing sufficient evidence about the severity of patients and condition of the two researches, it is unfairly to draw any conclusion.
Second, we are not informed of the possible side effect of the sugar pill which might cause the lower level of healing of patients who suffered from muscle strains. It is entirely possible that sugar pills given by Dr. Alton determine the healing rate among patients. Without ruling out this possibility, I can not be convinced that antibiotics can help cure the disease.
Even if the antibiotic is indeed helpful to heal secondary infections of patients suffered from muscle strain, it is unnecessary to advise patients to take antibiotics, since not all the patients after severe muscle strain may suffered the secondary infections. Without additional explanation of such situation, I cannot accept the author's sweeping generalization about the recommendation to apply antibiotics to patients.
Forth, the author’s recommendation fails to consider the possible side effect of antibiotics. Granted that the antibiotics cause more problems than it solves, it can be used widely among patients. Without analyzing the possible effect of antibiotics on patients, it is doubtful to take the author’s recommendation into consideration.
In conclusion, as it stands the argument is wholly unpersuasive. To bolster it the author must provide evidence of the either condition in research designed by Dr. Newland and Dr. Alton. The author also needs to explain the possible influence of the sugar pills on healing. To better assess the recommendation, I would need more information about what is the proportion of patient suffered from the secondary infection after muscle strain.

kidsonxianUID: 3001754

1# civilpp

写在别人贴子的回复上的内容，你自己看看吧，会有帮助的；虽然下面写的段落等与你写的不同，但是犯了同样的很多错误，要给力 啊！！！！







大概都能踩到点子上去了，有几个建议供参考的，第一就是写作的逻辑问题；原文大概有3点是前提条件，即严重受伤，二次感染和抗生素的效果；而最有讨论价值的，是“抗生素效果”这一点；所以可以分为3个层次讨论，第一层，严重性；第二层，未知是否真的二次感染；第三层是药物效果；一、二层比较简单，不讲了；第三层写效果，要写到抗生素是否真的起到了作用；通过治疗时间，就能判断吗？不然，因为正如你所写的有很多的因素；

但是你也犯了16楼文章的错误；逻辑链如下：很多原因-----治疗时间不一-----抗生素未必有效；红线-----是你所写的，却遗漏了后边重要的部分；你说，医生不同，可能导致时间不一，但我说，医生是外部影响，药物是内部影响，当然是内部因素重要啦；我也可以说，可能用抗生素的医生是差的，用糖的医生更好，现在差医生的病人恢复更快，说明抗生素好；但是，如果你直接说，就算治疗时间段，但抗生素未必有效；我就只能问，为神马呢？

具体如下：虽治疗时间短，但抗生素未必有效；（在严重和二次感染的前提）；抗生素有效，在于它杀菌的功效、用量、用时等，而身体机能的恢复，在于病人本身；两个时间加起来，才是治疗时间；所以，病人的体质、生活都是应该控制的因素，这些因素要得以控制；即使病人体质一样，治疗时间短，只能说明抗生素可能有效，至于是否真正有效，还要看用量、用时等；药物用多了就是毒物，这个道理比较简单，药物释放时间也会影响杀菌时间；所以说，单凭时间，不足以说明抗生素有效；



逻辑链：前提（包括严重和感染）+很多原因（包括医生、体质）-----治疗时间长短不同-----理论正确-----应用前提（包括严重和感染）-----应该对人运用此理论（吃antibiotic）；

注意红色部分是你的批判攻击对象；
我们要批的重点，是逻辑链的推导过程，即是------的部分；你第二段说，即使理论对了，病人未必严重，未必感染；但是我说，如果病人既严重，又感染呢，你怎么办？你又说，人的体质不同；我说，假如体质都相同呢，你怎办？你就说可以用药了吗？！？！但是，如果你能直接批判导，即使严重、感染这些都符合，但是还是不能用药，因为其中逻辑有误；为神马呢？？？因为很多用药因素需要考虑到，例如人体抗拒性，过敏，人的生活习惯，吸烟，喝酒；除了人，药物呢？药物用量呢？用时呢？药物效果呢？病菌对药物的抗拒呢？记住，不要批判原文提出来的那些所谓事实和数据，要批判推导过程，就是那些------；

用你的第三段作为例子，（转自己的贴，我也用同样例子回复了你的组员）具体如下：虽治疗时间短，但抗生素未必有效；（在严重和二次感染的前提）；抗生素有效，在于它杀菌的功效、用量、用时等，而身体机能的恢复，在于病人本身；两个时间加起来，才是治疗时间；所以，病人的体质、生活都是应该控制的因素，这些因素要得以控制；即使病人体质一样，治疗时间短，只能说明抗生素可能有效，至于是否真正有效，还要看用量、用时等；药物用多了就是毒物，这个道理比较简单，药物释放时间也会影响杀菌时间；所以说，单凭时间，不足以说明抗生素有效；