Argument51 【米国有米】小组 第三次作业,请猛批

ernest81888UID: 2247639

Argument 51--- Conclusion: all the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.（Sub-conclusion: The secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain）

提纲

开头---让步式开头

错误1—Hasty Generalization（条件不明）： 两组患者的数量不明，年龄层次不明，肌肉损伤程度不明，在没有明确以上疑问前，实验是没有依据的。

错误2--- Causal oversimplification(执果索因)：因为第一组的平均康复期比正常快了40%，第二组没有提高，就一定认为是抗生素起的作用。（其他相关因素需要排除）错误2可以和错误1形成DOUBLE-HIT

错误3---即便是假说被证明(Hasty Generalization结论直接放大)---二次感染回妨碍了一些患者的迅速康复速度（服用抗生素）。却无法得到结果—任何被确诊为肌肉损伤的患者需要服用抗生素 错误3可以和错误1，2形成triple-hit

In this argument, the author makes a conclusion that all the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. This conclusion is based on the study of two groups of patients. At a first glance, the argument appears to be somehow plausible, but further reflection reveals that suffers from at least 3 logical flaws.

Firstly, the fact that the first group’s recuperation time was averagely 40 percent quicker than typically expected, whereas the second group’s was not significantly reduced. Yet the author provides no evidence that this is the case. Perhaps the number of specimen of two groups is not equal or perhaps muscle strain degree of two groups is different. Besides, it is also possible that one group consists of youth, while elders make up of the other one. If this is the case, the author’s non-detailed experiment group condition render the conclusion based upon it highly suspect.

Secondly, even if the two study group’s condition are representative. It is still highly doubtful that it is because the using of antibiotics lead to the difference of recuperation time. While taking antibiotics might be an important element in determining the recover speed. It is hardly the only one. To establish a general causal relationship between using antibiotics and reducing recuperation time, other fact that could be result two group’s difference recover time should be considered and eliminated. For example, Dr. Newland’s method of treating for muscle injures might overweight the effect provided by taking antibiotics. Or perhaps Dr. Alton is not good at helping people recover from muscle strain. All that I mentioned above would possible lead to the result the first group takes less time in getting well. The author’s failure to investigate or even consider other possible explanations for the experiment let the conclusion seemed groundless.

Lastly, even if the hypothesis has been proved by the result of the study of two groups of patients, this can only reflect secondary infections keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. We should also consider that some kinds of people might be ineffective in using antibiotics. Additionally, possibility exists there are some people sensitive to the antibiotics, therefore taking a antibiotics might be a disadvantage in reducing their recover time.

In sum, the conclusion is not well supported. To bolster it the author is recommended to provide special evidence that group one’s taking antibiotics is only the element attribute their quicker recuperation time. Also, in order to better assess the strength of conclusion I would need more information about the two group study. It would also be helpful to make a complete investigation to find whether all the people will benefit from given antibiotics or not.

P.S.时间上我还是写的很慢.......

[ 本帖最后由 ernest81888 于 2006-11-27 21:07 编辑 ]

aefiterUID: 2134740

大家提纲都是惊人地相似啦

ernest81888UID: 2247639

:loveliness: 我觉得单从逻辑来讲,这篇我攻击的重点掌握的不错,不知道大家觉得怎么样?

锡匠UID: 2266221

In this argument, the author makes a conclusion that all the patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. This conclusion is based on the study of two groups of patients. At a first glance, the argument appears to be somehow plausible, but further reflection reveals that suffers from at least 3 logical flaws.

Firstly, the fact that the first group’s recuperation time was averagely 40 percent quicker than typically expected, whereas the second group’s was not significantly reduced. Yet the author provides no evidence that this is the case. Perhaps the number of specimen of two groups is not equal or perhaps muscle strain degree of two groups is different. Besides, it is also possible that one group consists of youth, while elders make up of the other one. If this is the case, the author’s non-detailed experiment group condition render the conclusion based upon it highly suspect.

Secondly, even if the two study group’s condition are representative. It is still highly doubtful that it is because the using of antibiotics lead to the difference of recuperation time. While taking antibiotics might be an important element in determining the recover speed. It is hardly the only one. To establish a general causal relationship between using antibiotics and reducing recuperation time, other fact that could be result two group’s difference recover time should be considered and eliminated. For example, Dr. Newland’s method of treating for muscle injures might overweight the effect provided by taking antibiotics. Or perhaps Dr. Alton is not good at helping people recover from muscle strain. All that I [have] mentioned above would possible lead to the result the first group takes less time in getting well. The author’s failure to investigate or even consider other possible explanations for the experiment let the conclusion seemed groundless.

Lastly, even if the hypothesis has been proved by the result of the study of two groups of patients, this can only reflect secondary infections keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. We should also consider that some kinds of people might be ineffective in using antibiotics. [这前两句是啥逻辑关系some. Some一些可以，一些不可以吗？] Additionally, possibility exists there are some people sensitive to the antibiotics, therefore taking a antibiotics might be a disadvantage in reducing their recover time. [这一点提得挺好的]

In sum, the conclusion is not well supported. To bolster it the author is recommended to provide special evidence that group one’s taking antibiotics is only the element attribute their quicker recuperation time. Also, in order to better assess the strength of conclusion I would need more information about the two group study. It would also be helpful to make a complete investigation to find whether all the people will benefit from given antibiotics or not.



我似乎是不晓得写argu ， 也不晓得改argu啊，觉得没什么好改的，主要是逻辑上的问题，能抓出来就能写好。语言和句式都是很现成的，也没得什么好说。
还是issue有意思

锡匠UID: 2266221

其实我觉得句子与句子之间的逻辑性总的来说还不是很清晰，只是不知道要怎么样修正。