Argument200 [aero作文组] 第14次作业

geyserUID: 2446453

The notion that dentists should target the male consumer and emphasize the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of the staff to nervous or suffering patients seems at first glance to be an obvious recommendation, but by prudent examination, we may find the arguments contains several facets that makes it unconvincing as it stands.

First, the reliability and the generalization of the survey are open to question. To evaluate the survey, one must consider the basic number of the survey. It is entirely possible that women are more afraid to visit the dentists, perhaps there are much more male patients seeing dentists than female patients, the conclusion is not convincing. Also, the arguer fails to provide details of the statistics such as the broad of the survey. Whether the data was only collected from a certain limited area? Does the numbers of samples are sufficient to make a conclusion? Factors as I mentioned above could explain the survey results and undermine the generalization of the results.

Even if the survey is reliable, the argument suffers from unwarranted casual relationship. The implicit rationale behind the arguer's conclusion that men are more likely to be distress is that it is distress that causes faint. The arguer fails to provide sufficient evidence to support the conclusion. In addition, the arguer fails to consider other alternative explanations such as perhaps male patients are more likely to choose a smaller dose of anesthesia; therefore they faint because of the paining they suffer from.

Moreover, the arguer's recommendation that dentists should advertise their effectiveness of anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients to attract male patients is unconvincing. There is absolutely no evidence provided that more advertisement on these aspects can bring more patients. The most important thing of a dentist is his/her dental skill, rather than any other thing. A prospective possibility is that such advertisement may lead to less male patients according to they are not willing to let others know their frightened of visiting dentist. Before dentists make a decision to invent heavily in advertisements, a more complete understanding of the benefits provided by the advertisements should be taken into consideration.

In conclusion, the argument based on the survey from dentists could provide important information. Before conclusion about advertising is reached, evidence that the correlation is indeed a casual relationship should be provided. Moreover, it could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for both the supposed casual relationship and potential solution.