Argument5 第2篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！

hanson_wonnUID: 197715

------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 the above argument, the arguer concludes that over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable and in ten years it is more likely that the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals. The arguer cites several evidences to substantiate his/her conclusion and his/her argument seems to be reasonable at first glance. However, close scrutiny of his/her argument reveals that there are still several severe logical fallacies and his/her argument is open to questions.

In the first place, the author falsely assumes that pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable, given that the number of people in their country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years. First, the arguer fails to cite any evidence to prove the reliability of such a prediction. Perhaps, such a prediction of people with arthritis problems is ill-based and turns to be wrongly-headed. Second, even if more people will develop arthritis problems, it does not necessarily mean that the pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable, since whether it is profitable should be strictly based on benefit-cost analysis. Perhaps, most of people with arthritis problems are likely to choose to have physical treatment instead of taking pills. In turn, the sales will sharply declined and no profit can be expected. It is still highly possible that the cost for making such pill has increased much, and it is of no profit to continue to produce pills for arthritis disease. Consequently, without ruling out such possibilities, it is unwarranted to claim that pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable.

In the second place, the mere fact that the patent on Xenon expires in three years and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug, is insufficient to generalize that Becton Pharmaceuticals will lose its advantage in the market and turn to be less profitable than Perkins Pharmaceuticals. Perhaps, even if the same drug has been produced by other companies, customers are more likely to buy the drugs from Becton Pharmaceuticals, since most of them put more confidence on the quality of drugs produced by them.

In the third place, the arguer wrongly assumes that Perkins will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company, given that clinical studies show Xylan produced by them is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis. First, the studies are not statistically reliable, since ten patients cannot be representative of all the patients who have arthritis problems. Secondly, such patients are the ones that are suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis, and in turn may have a different view with the patients who have slight arthritis problems. Consequently, the opinions or preferences shown by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis cannot be based to generalize that Xylan will be popular, since the arguer overlooks the preferences of people with slight arthritis problems. Moreover, even if Xylan will be popular, no evidence is given to prove that it will be profitable.

To sum up, in order to better generalize the conclusion, the arguer needs to cite more evidence to prove that more people will develop arthritis problems in the future and will boost the profit of pharmaceutical companies. Furthermore, the arguer still needs to offer information to show that Becton Pharmaceuticals will not be as profitable as Perkins Pharmaceuticals in the future. Still, the arguer needs to provide extra data to substantiate that more people tend to buy Xylan drugs to cure their disease instead of Xenon, and such a phenomenon will boost its profits.

imjasonUID: 176604

看你的名字很像我的一个同学
先顶一个

imjasonUID: 176604

------正文------
In the above argument, the arguer concludes that over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable and in ten years it is more likely that the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals. The arguer cites several evidences to substantiate his/her conclusion and his/her argument seems to be reasonable at first glance. However, close scrutiny of his/her argument reveals that there are still several severe logical fallacies and his/her argument is open to questions.着后面的就已经是重复了。

In the first place, the author falsely assumes that pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable, given that the number of people in their country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years. First, the arguer fails to cite any evidence to prove the reliability of such a prediction. Perhaps, such a prediction of people with arthritis problems is ill-based and turns to be wrongly-headed. Second, even if more people will develop arthritis problems, it does not necessarily mean that the pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable, since whether it is profitable should be strictly based on benefit-cost analysis. Or Perhaps, most of people with arthritis problems are likely to choose to have physical treatment instead of taking pills. In turn, the sales will sharply declined and no profit can be expected. It is still highly possible that the cost for making such pill has increased much, and it is of no profit to continue to produce pills for arthritis disease.这个就优点牵强了，没有说价格不变了 Consequently, without ruling out such possibilities, it is unwarranted to claim that pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. 呵呵，爆长的第一段哈

In the second place, the mere fact that the patent on Xenon expires in three years and other companies will then be able to produce a cheaper version of the drug,可以不要逗号了 is insufficient to generalize that Becton Pharmaceuticals will lose its advantage in the market and turn to be less profitable than Perkins Pharmaceuticals. Perhaps, even if the same drug has been produced by other companies, customers are more likely to buy the drugs from Becton Pharmaceuticals, since most of them put more confidence on the quality of drugs produced by them. 展开得不够了

In the third place, the arguer wrongly assumes that Perkins will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company, given that clinical studies show Xylan produced by them is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis. First, the studies are not statistically reliable, since ten patients cannot be representative of all the patients who have arthritis problems. Secondly, such patients are the ones that are suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis, and in turn may have a different view with the patients who have slight arthritis problems. Consequently, the opinions or preferences shown by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis cannot be based to generalize that Xylan will be popular, since the arguer overlooks the preferences of people with slight arthritis problems. Moreover, even if Xylan will be popular, no evidence is given to prove that it will be profitable.这个moreover后面如果不出现这段就很好了

To sum up, in order to better generalize the conclusion, the arguer needs to cite more evidence to prove that more people will develop arthritis problems in the future and will boost the profit of pharmaceutical companies. Furthermore, the arguer still needs to offer information to show that Becton Pharmaceuticals will not be as profitable as Perkins Pharmaceuticals in the future. Still, the arguer needs to provide extra data to substantiate that more people tend to buy Xylan drugs to cure their disease instead of Xenon, and such a phenomenon will boost its profits.
不错哈，逻辑清晰

hanson_wonnUID: 197715

楼上的仁兄是我的同学吗？
呵呵，我是在Johns Hopkins 的， 你呢？