argument 5 第一篇argu, 请大家拍砖，谢谢

yasserUID: 159429

Argument 5
题目
The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.
'Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis.'
正文
  In this argument, the arguer concludes that Perkins Pharmaceutical will become the most profitable pharmaceutical company in ten years. To substantiate his conclusion, the arguer points out that pharmaceutical companies should be very profitable because the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis increases. In addition, the argument cites the result of a clinical study that the new drug of Perkins company, Xylan, is preferred by many arthritis patients. However, the argument suffers from several logical flaws and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

   First of all, the argument rests on the assumption that drugs produced by pharmaceutical companies in our country should be well selling and these companies should correspondingly be very profitable when the number of people with some form of arthritis rises. However, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. Perhaps, people would rather suffer from pain than buy drugs because the prices of drugs may be too high. Besides, it is entirely possible that patients prefer the drug from oversea to that from our companies since the effect of former is more noticeable. Factors, such as the price and the effect of the drug, both have something with the sales of drugs and profits of companies. Therefore, the argument is unconvincing without ruling out these possibilities.

   Secondly, the arguer unfairly implies that the profit of Becton company should decline when the patent of Xenon, the best -selling drug of this company expires and a cheaper version of Xenon is produced by other companies. Yet the author fails to provide evidence to support this assumption. It is very likely that Becton company will be able to develop another new drug with the better effect and the cheaper price to replace Xenon so that the company may still be very profitable. Therefore, the argument is dubious without considering such possibility.

    Thirdly, Even if Becton company will be influenced by its patent problem, we cannot accept the conclusion of the author. The study cited by the author may be misleading. The fact that Patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis prefer Xylan over Xenon is not able to demonstrate that Xylan is better than Xenon at dealing with the most extreme cases. Possibly, they prefer Xylan because of suggestions from doctors. Even if we grant that Xylan is better, it does not mean that all kinds of arthritis patients have the same choice to buy Xylan. Perhaps, Xylan is only effective to the most extreme cases of arthritis, rather than all cases of arthritis, which cannot lead to the good sale of Xylan. Therefore, the conclusion of argument is unreliable.

    To sum up, perhaps the arguer has some otherwise sound reasons for his argument, but the evidences and the reasoning mentioned above are not sufficient and well grounded. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide the evidences concerning that Becton company will not be profitable due to its patent and Xylan of Perkins company will have a good sale.

yasserUID: 159429

没有人啊？up一下
快考试了 才第一篇，紧张啊

祝大家考试成功

frankskyUID: 187253

我也是新手，对于许多问题的看法可能也不准确，致使提供一些印象吧。
首先，据我理解，原题所要表达的意思是becton or perkins is the most profitalbe company in ten years. so i think that we  should focus on this point, and the increasing number of arthritis people is the major premise, in the first para. it is not necessary to cite this as evidence .

secondly, you can add more evidence to deepen the your criticism, e.g.……，which may be more profitable than perkins ,Xenon so that the company may still be very profitable

the comment of your first para. is very cute ^_^

imjasonUID: 176604

占个座先，
要上课了。

yasserUID: 159429

franksky, many thanks!
your suggestion is very helpful for me to improve my argument in this short time.
Good luck to you!

imjasonUID: 176604

In this argument, the arguer concludes that Perkins Pharmaceutical will become the most profitable pharmaceutical company in ten years. To substantiate his conclusion, the arguer points out that pharmaceutical companies should用would可能要好点 be very profitable because the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis increases. In addition, the argument cites the result of a clinical study that the new drug of Perkins company, Xylan, is preferred by many arthritis patients. However, the argument suffers from several logical flaws and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the argument rests on the assumption that drugs produced by pharmaceutical companies in our country should be well selling and these companies should correspondingly be very profitable when the number of people with some form of arthritis rises. However, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. Perhaps, people would rather suffer from pain than buy drugs because the prices of drugs may be too high.这个有点牵强哦，药可能还是要买的，只是便宜点，但不可能说忍痛 Besides, it is entirely possible that patients prefer the drug from oversea to that from our companies since the effect of former is more noticeable.原文好象没有说外国的好啊？我没有看到哦。就算是自己找的理由但是还是牵强了。 Factors, such as the price and the effect of the drug, both have something with the sales of drugs and profits of companies. Therefore, the argument is unconvincing without ruling out these possibilities.这段陈述的不是很清楚了

Secondly, the arguer unfairly implies that the profit of Becton company should decline when the patent of Xenon, the best -selling drug of this company expires and a cheaper version of Xenon is produced by other companies. Yet the author fails to provide evidence to support this assumption. It is very likely that Becton company will be able to develop another new drug with the需要the么？我个人觉得不需要 better effect and the cheaper price to replace Xenon so that the company may still be very profitable. Therefore, the argument is dubious without considering such possibility.

Thirdly, Even if Becton company will be influenced by its patent problem, we cannot accept the conclusion of the author. The study cited by the author may be misleading. The fact that Patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis prefer Xylan over Xenon is not able to demonstrate that Xylan is better than Xenon at dealing with the most extreme cases. Possibly, they prefer Xylan because of suggestions from doctors. Even if we grant that Xylan is better, it does not mean that all kinds of arthritis patients have the same choice to buy Xylan. Perhaps, Xylan is only effective to the most extreme cases of arthritis, rather than all cases of arthritis, which cannot lead to the good sale of Xylan. Therefore, the conclusion of argument is unreliable.

To sum up, perhaps the arguer has some otherwise sound reasons for his argument, but the evidences and the reasoning mentioned above are not sufficient and well grounded. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide the evidences concerning that Becton company will not be profitable due to its patent and Xylan of Perkins company will have a good sale.如果把需要的证据和理由更具体点可能结尾就更好了


不好意思，来晚了！

yasserUID: 159429

太谢谢了 建议很好，我会注意的
楼上，祝你好运！