argument51 【7\8\9\10】 7.19（first assignment）

野猪大改造UID: 2484392

求拍！必回拍！

In this argument, the author concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To justify this claim, the author cites a study of two groups of patients. However, this argument is open to doubt for several critical fallacies.

The major problem with this argument is that the author does not provide enough evidence, such as information about the patients' health condition, doctors and so on, to convince us that the two counterparts are comparable. Thus, it is possible that the patients of the second group are less likely to recover than the first ones because of their own health condition rather than antibiotics. Even if their health conditions are same, doctors' different experiences and levels also influence the result of the study. As it is known to all, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine knows more about the muscle strain than a general physician, so if the author does not exclude this factor, it is unconvincing that antibiotics contribute to the final result. Thirdly, the author does not exclude the sugar pill's influence on the recuperation time. So the comparison between the two groups is doubtful to support the conclusion.

Another flaw that weakens the logic of the argument is that the author advocates all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be advised to take antibiotics, while failing to convince us that the antibiotics is the best choice. Unless the author compares it with all other medicines which can also cure the patients with muscle strain, we can not believe that antibiotic is the choice of the patients because it is very likely that there is a medicine which is superior to antibiotic.
   
Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary to indicate another fallacy in this argument. The author assumes that the two groups of patients are suffering from secondary infections, while there is no information can be found in the argument. Hence, the claim that this hypothesis has been proved by the study is unconvincing.

To sum up, the conclusion is open to doubt because the evidence cited in the reasoning do not lend strong support to what the author maintains. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to present evidence that the two groups in the study are comparable. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about whether the antibiotic is superior to others and two groups of patients are suffering from secondary infections.   

atreusUID: 2471951

In this argument, the author concludes that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To justify this claim, the author cites a study of two groups of patients. However, this argument is open to doubt for several critical fallacies.

The major problem with this argument is that the author does not provide enough evidence, such as information about the patients' health condition, doctors and so on, to convince us that the two counterparts are comparable. Thus, it is possible that the patients of the second group are less likely to recover than the first ones because of their own health condition rather than 【lack of】antibiotics. Even if their health conditions are same, doctors' different experiences and levels also influence the result of the study. As it is known to all, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine knows more about the muscle strain than a general physician, so if the author does not exclude this factor, it is unconvincing that antibiotics contribute to the final result. Thirdly, the author does not exclude the sugar pill's influence on the recuperation time【根据常识sugar pill没有作用，只能说安慰剂所起到的心理作用了，如果不展开可以不提了】. So the comparison between the two groups is doubtful to support the conclusion.【攻击证据】

Another flaw that weakens the logic of the argument is that the author advocates all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be advised to take antibiotics, while failing to convince us that the antibiotics is the best choice. Unless the author compares it with all other medicines which can also cure the patients with muscle strain, we can not believe that antibiotic is the choice of the patients because it is very likely that there is a medicine which is superior to antibiotic. 【攻击结论】
   
Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary to indicate another fallacy in this argument. The author assumes that the two groups of patients are suffering from secondary infections, while there is no information can be found in the argument. Hence, the claim that this hypothesis has been proved by the study is unconvincing. 【这个攻击前提的很不错，也很重要】

To sum up, the conclusion is open to doubt【open to question，有点变化会更好】 because the evidence cited in the reasoning do not lend strong support to what the author maintains. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to present evidence that the two groups in the study are comparable. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about whether the antibiotic is superior to others and two groups of patients are suffering from secondary infections.

【整体写得相当棒，每个点（假设前提，证据和结论）都攻击很好，使用它因法，但攻击顺序是不是先结论再证据最后前提的顺序比较好点，或者反着来，这样符合逻辑链，可以和你讨论一下】

warboyUID: 2444492

不错，特别是第三个质疑很好，吧比较有新意！