Argument35【0906G 文以载道三月四月小组】第一周第一次作业 by luyaoxu

luyaoxuUID: 2588850

The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia.
"Salicylates（水杨酸脂） are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives（食品香料） for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."
水杨酸酯和用来治疗头痛的药物--阿司匹林是同一类化合物。尽管很多食品天然富含水杨酸酯，过去几十年中食品加工公司仍然在食品中加入它来作为防腐剂。这种水杨酸酯在商业上的使用被发现与我们为期20年研究的参加者所报告的头痛发病的平均数量下降是相关的。最近，食品加工公司发现水杨酸酯也可以被用作食品香料。根据这种水杨酸酯的新用途，我们可以预期Mentia居民患头痛症的数量将会持续稳步下降。
In this argument, the author claims that the new use of salicylates will continue to decline the number of headaches. To substantiate this claim, the author points out that salicylates belong to the same family as aspirin, and provides the evidence that the commercial use of salicylates is to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants. The line of reasoning is vulnerable in several aspects.
The threshold presumption is that the rise of commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline of headaches. But the author shows no rigid and reliable scientific research to prove it, which poses an unwarranted assumption. Through salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, similar structure doesn’t guarantee the same chemical function. The argument here is not convincing.
The author cites a twenty-year study to demonstrate that in the decades when salicylates were added to food as preservatives, the number of headaches reported by people decreases. First, the author fails to exclude the cases that some people having a headache didn’t report to the study. Besides, the author unfairly ignores other factors that may contribute to the ease of headaches, such as developed medical technology, improved quality of surrounding environment or more regular living habits. Therefore the conclusion that the food containing salicylates facilitates reduction of headaches is presumptuous.
On a groundless and unwarranted basis as above, the author easily predict in further that with a new use for salicylates, the steady decline of number of headaches in the average citizen in Mentia is expected. Here the sophistication of human body function is simplified. There are many other prime criminals that can damage health and aggravate the headaches, for instance sudden work stress or abrupt living pace and so on. Without other comparison information, we cann’t get to the conclusion as the author claims. Last not the least, common sense tells us that things will develop in the opposite direction when they become extreme. So assume the salicylate is beneficial for treatment of headaches, whether it is the more , the better? The author presents no directions or explanations.
All in all, the author commits a false analogy and forecasts a opinionated conclusion on a flawed assumption. In addition, many other important factors that affect human bodies are filtered by the author. So in order to convince others, more solid proofs need to be provided.

sibslccUID: 2463158

sorry,
我以为waidsw跨楼层改你的呢
于是我就往下找了一个没有楼上的帖子，把它改了
结果谁知道这个waidsw只改了你第一篇
郁闷，早知道他只是个插队的，我就改你的了
sorry，我一定补上

sibslccUID: 2463158

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-909336-1-1.html

waidswUID: 2256074

实在对不起。我不是你们组的，我是luyaoxu的私人作文陪练，虽然我水平很差，但盛情难却，只好同意了。

[ 本帖最后由 waidsw 于 2009-1-14 14:19 编辑 ]

waidswUID: 2256074

In this argument, the author claims that the new use of salicylates will continue to decline (decline is vi, you cannot use it like this, decrease may be a substitution.) the number of headaches. To substantiate this claim, the author points out that salicylates belong to the same family as aspirin, and provides the evidence that the commercial use of salicylates is to correlate(to correlate —>correlated) with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants. The line of reasoning is vulnerable in several aspects.

The threshold presumption is that the rise of commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline of headaches. But the author shows no rigid and reliable scientific research to prove it, which poses an unwarranted assumption.(Given more explanations, the previous part can be extended to a separate paragraph.) Through (Though) salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, similar structure doesn’t guarantee the same chemical function. (Too abstract! )The argument here is not convincing.
The author cites a twenty-year study to demonstrate that in the decades when salicylates were added to food as preservatives, the number of headaches reported by people decreases. First, the author fails to exclude the cases that some people having a headache didn’t report to the study. Besides, the author unfairly ignores other factors that may contribute to the ease of headaches, such as developed medical technology, improved quality of surrounding environment or more regular(healthy) living habits. Therefore the conclusion that the food containing salicylates facilitates reduction of headaches is presumptuous.(trustless, invalid) (This paragraph and the previous one have a lot in common. Maybe you can arrange your structure in other ways)

On a groundless and unwarranted basis as above, the author easily predict in further that  (easily concluded that in the future) with a new use for salicylates, the steady decline of number of headaches in the average citizen in Mentia is expected. Here the sophistication of human body function is simplified. There are many other prime criminals (potential causes) that can damage health and aggravate the headaches, for instance sudden (suddenly, increased) work stress or abrupt living pace (unhealthy living style) and so on. Without other comparison information (without excluding all other possibilities), we cann’t(cannot) get to the conclusion as the author claims. Last not the least, common sense tells us that things will develop in the opposite direction when they become extreme. So assume (assuming) the salicylate is beneficial for treatment of headaches, whether it is the more , the better?( Is it the more the better?) The author presents no directions or explanations.(only explanations is ok)
All in all, the author commits a false analogy and forecasts a opinionated conclusion on a flawed assumption. In addition, many other important factors that affect human bodies are filtered by the author. So in order to convince others, more solid proofs need to be provided.

This argument is much better than your last one. Keep going and you will be great.

sibslccUID: 2463158

没关系，我以为你只是冒下头就没了呢
那你继续改吧
我水平超级凹的

luyaoxuUID: 2588850

In this argument, the author claims that the new use of salicylates will continue to decrease the number of headaches steadily. To substantiate this claim, the author points out that salicylates belong to the same family as aspirin and cites a tenty-year study to show that a rise in the commercial use of salicylates as food additives correlated with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in the past decades.The line of reasoning is vulnerable in several aspects.

The threshold presumption is that the salicylates help to ease or treat headaches, which the author shows no rigid and reliable scientific evidence to prove. Though the salicylate is a member of the same chemical family as aspirin, it only demonstrates that the salicylate and aspirin share a similar chemical structure. Well, similar structure doesn’t guarantee the same chemical function. Actually, when the salicylate is mixed up with other chemical materials serving as flavor additives, it probably loses effect or even worse funtions adversely.So the argument here is not unquestioning with an unwarranted assumption posed..

Secondly, the author takes it for granted that the use of the salicylates in food directly results in the decline of headaches according to a twenty-year study, which is presumptuous. To start with, the study lacks information to assure that it's the salicylate, rather than other chemicals in additives which have a good chance, that have a correlation with the decline of number of headaches. Furthermore, concerning about the statistical credibility of the study, the author fails to exclude the cases that some patients having a headache didn’t report to the study. What's worse, the author unfairly ignores other factors that may contribute to the ease of headaches, such as developed medical technology, improved quality of surrounding environment or healthier living habits. In short, simply in terms of the study mentioned by author, it doesn't suffice to conclude a causal relationship between the salicylates and the steady decline of headaches.

On a groundless assumption and opionated deduction as above, the author easily concludes that in the future with a new use for salicylates, the steady decline of number of headaches in the average citizen in Mentia is expected. However, the sophistication of human body function is simplified. There are many other potencial causes that can damage health and aggravate the headaches, for instance, suddenly increased work stress or unhealthy living style and so on. Without excluding all other possibilities, we cannot get to the conclusion as the author claims. Last not the least, ususlly things will develop in the opposite direction when they become extreme; assuming the salicylate is beneficial for treatment of headaches, is it the more the better? The author presents no explanations.

All in all, the author commits a false analogy and forecasts a opinionated conclusion on a flawed assumption. In addition, many other important factors that affect human bodies are filtered by the author. So in order to convince others, more solid proofs need to be provided.

[ 本帖最后由 luyaoxu 于 2009-1-16 22:36 编辑 ]