ARGUMENT96[FF小组] by alpsky有拍必回，欢迎互改

alpskyUID: 2438084

征友互改，共同进步

题目：ARGUMENT96- The following appeared in a magazine focusing on health and fitness.

"A recent study of several nutritionalsupplements showed that subjects who took a daily pill containing luceen hadsignificantly better vision of distant objects than subjects in the study whotook other nutritional supplements. Luceen appears naturally in a tasty fruitthat grows on the island of Bonopia, and very fewinhabitants of that island wear eyeglasses or other corrective lenses. Suchevidence suggests that people who develop vision problems should take regularluceen supplements."
字数：379          用时：0:37:22          日期：2008-11-24

In this argument, the arguer recommendsthat luceen supplement can treat vision problems. To support this claim, thearguer cites a recent study showing that pills containing luceen has effect onbetter vision of distant. Moreover the arguer cites the example of Bonopia. Asit stands, the argument suffers from several patent flaws as follows.

First of all, the validity of the study isdoubtful. Lacking information about the basic health situation of the employeessurveyed, it is impossible to access the validity of the results. For example,subjects who took a daily pill have a better vision of distant objects than theother group before taking this survey. And also the two groups have the similarmeals and the similar exercises which may influence the vision of distantobjects as well. Without ruling out these and other possible factors, thearguer cannot confidently conclude that it is the daily pill containing luceenthat improved the subjects' vision.

In addition, the arguer fails to establisha cause relationship between very few inhabitants wearing eyeglasses or othercorrective and the claim that lucan appears naturally on this island. Firstlythe arguer does not provide any evidence showing that it is luceen not thehabits and other reasons that make the inhabitants good eyesight. Furthermore,without eyeglasses and other corrective lenses do not represent thatinhabitants have a good eyesight. It is highly possible that the island is toofar away from the modern world to know anything about eyeglasses and othercorrective lenses. So the arguer's assumption is unwarranted too.

Finally, even assuming that luceen havegood affection to improve vision of distant objects, it does not follow thatpeople who have vision problems should take regular luceen supplements. Forinstance, some people with poor eyesight are oversensitive to luceensupplements. Besides, there is no evidence showing that it can improve thesight of people who have bad vision of nearby objects. So, the arguer commits afallacy of hasty generalization.

To sum up, we can safely conclude that theargument has several patent flaws. To make it logically acceptable, the arguershould provide more concrete evidence to prove the validity of the study. Tobetter evaluate the argument, we need to know more concerning the disadvantagesof the luceen.

enidzanUID: 2492035

如果红色刷了两个单词，就是要加空格的地方，我也经常忘记空格，呵呵
In this argument, the arguer recommends that luceen supplement can treat vision problems. To support this claim, the arguer cites a recent study showing that pills containing luceen has effect on better vision of distant. Moreover the arguer cites the example of Bonopia. As it stands, the argument suffers from several patent flaws as follows.你在首段列举了两个错误会不会有点少。

First of all, the validity of the study is doubtful. Lacking information about the basic health situation of the employeessurveyed, it is impossible to access the validity of the results. For example,subjects who took a daily pill have a better vision of distant objects than the other group before taking this survey. And also the two groups have the similar meals and the similar exercises which may influence on the vision of distant objects as well. Without ruling out these (and other)最好去掉 possible factors, the arguer cannot confidently conclude that it is the daily pill containing luceenthat improved the subjects' vision.例子举得不错！有通用性

In addition, the arguer fails to establish a causable relationship between very few inhabitants who我想最好做从句处理 wearing eyeglasses or other correctives and the claim that lucan appears naturally on this island. Firstly the arguer does not provide any evidence for showing (that it is) luceen is not the habits and other reasons that make the inhabitants good eyesight. Furthermore,without eyeglasses and other corrective lenses do not represent that inhabitants have a good eyesight. It is highly possible that the island is too（此句最好用so that句型） far away from the modern world to know anything about eyeglasses and othercorrective lenses. So the arguer's assumption is unwarranted too.展开得很好，很有条理

Finally, even assuming that luceen have good affection to（on） improve加ing吧 vision of distant objects, it does not follow that people who have vision problems should take regular luceen supplements. For instance, some people with poor eyesight are oversensitive to luceen supplements. Besides, there is no evidence showing that it can improve the sight of people who have bad vision of nearby objects. So, the arguer commits a fallacy of hasty generalization.

To sum up, we can safely conclude that the argument has several patent flaws. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer should provide more concrete evidence to prove the validity of the study. To（In order to会好一点） better evaluate the argument, we need to know more concerning the disadvantages of the luceen.我写的结尾也是类似这样的
我觉得你的例子举得不错，我总觉得自己没啥例子可用呢！