argument160 G89 12号作业 !argu 还没有被拍过，帮忙看看吧/bow

nkchanceUID: 188069

Argument160  第24篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：32分40秒     
从2005年7月12日11时2分到2005年7月12日11时32分
------题目------
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.
------正文------
The arguer asserts that the application of compounds on students can finally solve the serious problems in school performance. To support his assertion, the arguer cites researchers' newly research and successful experiments on rats. However, the assertion suffers from several critical fallacies though it seems logical at first glance.

First of all, the experiment experience on rats can not applied on people directly. After all, the brains of human beings are extremely more complex than that of the rats. No one can warrant that the compounds will function and will not affect other normal function of human brains. Without full-scale examination about the compounds, people can not use them directly. Moreover, these compounds may contribute to some serious diseases.

Secondly, the arguer fails to provide any evidence to prove that the serious problems of students in school performance are caused by poor memory. There are many factors concerning with students performance. It is possible that teachers can not provide proper instruction, It is also possible that the stress coming from the competition between peers renders the problems. If the arguer can not rule out these possible reasons, we can not accept the assertion simply. Taking the compounds can not solve all the possible problems contributing to the poor performance.  

Finally, no evidence support that the compounds has curing effect on concentrating. Even in the experiments on rats, the arguer does not indicate the consequence concerning about concentrating problems. So it is unconvincing for the assertion about the curing effect on concentrating problems, when the compounds are applied on human beings.

In sum, the assertion is not well reasoned, to make it more convincing, the arguer should provide synthetical analysis about the compounds’ effect on human beings. Additionally, to solve the students' problem about their performance, the auger should seek out the real reasons leading to the results. Taking medicine is always not proper way to solve such problems.