argument53 <米国有米寒假作业 >

blackswitchUID: 2110679

1.       25 infants,mild distress
53Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.

Based on a study about 25 infants, the arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life. As it stands, however, the argument is lack of credibility due to following fallacies.

First of all, the major weak point undermining the reasoning of the argument is that the arguer bases his conclusion on a dubious study. The number of infants involved in the study, 25 ,might constitute an insufficiently small sample to draw any reliable conclusion. Also, the sample might be unrepresentative of the all of infants as a whole. For example, perhaps these infants come from the same place, and it is the environment they lived contributes to their mild distress. Moreover, the arguer unfairly assume these infants are mild distress, however, without comparison with other infants, one has a good chance to believe that other infants which do not conceived in autumn may be more distressed than them. In short, without this information, the arguer can not convince me that the study is reliable.

Secondly, even if the study is statistical reliable, the argument also assumes unfairly that these infants’ mild distress is the result of the increased melatonin before birth. In fact, the arguer ignores a host of other possible explanation. For instance, it is entirely possible that it is the condition of the whether of the autumn or other hormone in their mother’s bodies not the melatonin contributes to infants’ distress. In short, in order to substantiate that the melatonin causes these infants’ distress, the arguer must provide more convincing analysis about the function of melatonin.  

The last but not the least is that the arguer fails to establish a cause relationship between melatonin and children’s shyness. In this argument, the arguer informs us that more than half of children in the following study were identified shy thereby claiming that increased melatonin before birth explains their shyness. However, the arguer overlooks a myriad of other possible reason for children’s shyness. For example, perhaps parents of these shy children are also shy. If so, it is highly possible that it is the gene not the melatonin contributes to their shyness. Perhaps most of these children’s friends are shy and affect their children’s characters. In addition, perhaps these children have a strong study pressure and spend much time studying thereby overlooking communication with others. Besides, the schools, the teachers, the education and so on all have the possibility to influence these children’s character. Without considering and ruling out other alternative explanation for these children’s shyness. At the same time, the fact that not all children involved in the study are shy, to some extent, shows that the melatonin is not the only factor which causes shyness. Otherwise, all children should be shy not only more than half of them.

To sum up, the argument is logically unacceptable due to above flaws. To strength it, the arguer must provide clear evidence that the study is representative of all children as a whole and provide more scientific analysis about the cause-effect relationship between melatonin and children’s shyness.