Argument51【0710G Victors互助小组】第7次作业

fengyinyangUID: 2321139

Argument 51
In this argument, the arguer concludes that all patients diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment because of secondary infections which is believe to keep patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. In order to substantiate the conclusion, the argument shows the results of a study of two groups of treatment. In this study, one group whose recuperation time was 40 percent quicker than typically expected was treated by Dr. Newland and took antibiotics while the recuperation time of another group which was treated by Dr. Alton and given sugar pills was not significantly reduced. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless it is.

First of all, the arguer does not mention the situations of the injury in two groups. A serious strain may lead to a long healing time while the flesh wound would not. If patients in Dr. Newland's group only catch the former one and the wounded in Dr. Alton group, it is not surprising that Dr. Newland's group can recuperate much quickly than another. Moreover, if the patients treated by Dr. Newland are much stronger than other people and another group are made up of common people. Since the factors of patients are uncertain, the arguer can not confidently assume that.

Secondly, two doctors may use two different kinds of prescriptions except the antibiotics and sugar pills during the treatments of two groups. As we know, the sportsman need quick treatment, so as a doctor specializes in sports medicine, Dr. Newland may tend to use the most effective way while the general physician may choose a step-by-step process. If it is the other medicines that result in the quicker recuperation and the use of antibiotics and sugar pills have nothing to do with it, the conclusion can not be proved by such evidence.

Thirdly, the arguer does not refer to the number of patients, which is a significant element in the study. It's known to all that the larger number people join in the study, the more accurate it will be. If the number of patients in the study is only a few people and the results are only the average ones, it may involves some unsure factors. For example, some people are suitable for the treatment they take may recover more quickly than others. After all, the minorities can not represent all since they may be limited in catholicness. Therefore, unless we know the number of patients, the arguer can not draw any conclusion from the results.

In sum, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the situation of the patients and the medicine they take besides antibiotics and sugar pills. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding the quantity of patients in two groups.

[ 本帖最后由 fengyinyang 于 2007-6-16 15:51 编辑 ]