argument53 Please...

dychangfengUID: 2216148

In this argument, the arguer conclude that increased levels of some kind of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
To support this conclusion, the arguer cited a research studying a group of 25 infants
13 years ago and a follow-study conducted earlier this year. Having not convinced us
the credibility of this two research, I can not accept the authors sweep conclusion.

In the first place, the arguer fails to justify that the research was based on a random sampling. The research cited by the author just say that it is a group of 25 infants, not mentioning that where this infants came from. It is absolutely possible that all this infants come from one small town their mild distress in respond to unfamiliar stimuli was common in that town, having something in related with the weather, or water of that town. Or maybe that all of this 25 infants are come born in the same hospital, and their respond was related to the circumstance of the hospital. So failing to approve that this is a random sample, the research lend no support to the conclusion.

In the second place, the author confuse the correlation with causal relationship. The author said that these 25 infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, in which season when their mothers' production of melatonin decrease in respond to the decreased daylight. All of this evidence can just support that this two things happened one after another rather than one cause another. In order justify the causal relationship. The arguer have to eliminate other possibilities such as habit of lives and influence of their family.

In addition, the arguer commited  a fallacy of hasty generalization. Even if this rearch was proved correct with this sample, the arguer cannot draw out the conclusion, for its sample is too small to generalize. He can not guarantee the conclusion works out in all the other people in the world, since different people of different place have are not absolutely the same. Maybe it work out in some place but fail in another.

And finally, the author did not rule out the possibility that the mild distress to unfamiliar stimuli was just a usual respond of all infants to a dangerous world. What's more, the author merely said that the melatonin affect some brain functions, without pointing out whether the baby's or mother's brain will be affected.

To sum up, unless the author give more evidence about the random sampling, the causal relationship between levels of melatonin and shyness during infancy and later life, and any other evidence to prove the research was correct, I can not come to the conclusion that the author draws.
重写了提纲：
    1 the study’s sample must be sufficient in size and representative of all the people, including infants, the young, and the old.（重点攻击）
2 the author confuse the correlation with causal relationship.
3 The author fail to rule out other factors that maybe affect the result of the follow-up study. The shyness of teenagers may result from…（放在最后，略写）

[ 本帖最后由 dychangfeng 于 2006-7-23 02:25 编辑 ]

xinxinwUID: 2144273

In this argument, the arguer conclude that increased levels of some kind of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
To support this conclusion, the arguer cited a research studying a group of 25 infants
13 years ago and a follow-study conducted earlier this year. Having not convinced us
the credibility of this two research, I can not accept the authors sweep conclusion.语法错误，分次结构的逻辑主语跟主句一致

In the first place, the arguer fails to justify that the research was based on a random sampling. The research cited by the author just say that it is a group of 25 infants, not mentioning that where this infants came from. It is absolutely possible that all this infants come from one small town their mild distress in respond to unfamiliar stimuli was common in that town, having something in related with the weather, or water of that town. Or maybe that all of this 25 infants are come born in the same hospital, and their respond was related to the circumstance of the hospital. So failing to approve that this is a random sample, the research lend no support to the conclusion.

In the second place, the author confuse the correlation with causal relationship. The author said that these 25 infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, in which season when their mothers' production of melatonin decrease in respond to the decreased daylight. All of this evidence can just support that this two things happened one after another rather than one cause another. In orderto justify the causal relationship. The arguer have to eliminate other possibilities such as habit of lives and influence of their family.

In addition, the arguer commited  a fallacy of hasty generalization. Even if this rearch was proved correct with this sample, the arguer cannot draw out the conclusion, for its sample is too small to generalize. He can not guarantee the conclusion works out in all the other people in the world, since different people of different place have are not absolutely the same. Maybe it work out in some place but fail in another.

And finally, the author did not rule out the possibility that the mild distress to unfamiliar stimuli was just a usual respond of all infants to a dangerous world危言耸听了，赫赫. What's more, the author merely said that the melatonin affect some brain functions, without pointing out whether the baby's or mother's brain will be affected.

To sum up, unless the author give more evidence about the random sampling, the causal relationship between levels of melatonin and shyness during infancy and later life, and any other evidence to prove the research was correct, I can not come to the conclusion that the author draws.

用了四段内容，攻击了一个study，其他逻辑错误都没有提到。
语言不太规范，中文思维比较明显，可以从学习范文的语言开始，把每一类错误的攻击语句总结一下

dychangfengUID: 2216148

多谢啦，是该好好去研究一下范文，范文ing...