Argument35【0906G 文以载道三月四月小组】第一周第二次作业 on 过期的蛋糕

susannerUID: 2209224

题目：
Argument35
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 naturallyrich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processingcompanies 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 usedas 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 headachessuffered 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。

提纲：
1。同类化合物不代表有同样的功效对待头痛。
2。头痛者减少的原因还有很多，不一定是salycylates的使用造成的。（另外加一小点，在perservatives中的使用带来的效果不一定同样在additives的使用中出现）
3。participants in the study不能够代表the average citizen of Mentia。

（二三自然段都是说明调查结果证明不了S能治疗头痛，是放在一起好呢还是分开独立作段好呢？你自己习惯哪个就用哪个吧）

4.补充：即使上述成立，做香料也不能保证当地人吃那种食物，从而不能保证头痛会下降

5.补充：最好还能加上即使上述都成立，影响头痛还有其他因素，而这些因素很可能抵消了S的效用

正文：
This argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. At first glance, by pointing out that the rise in the commercial use of salicylates is correlated with a steady decline of headaches reported, the conclusion that a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia will occur after the further use of salicylates in flavor additives seems somewhat logical.【第一段开头没有给出结论，个人认为还是先给出结论，比如However, careful scrutiny/(a careful analysis) of the evidence (study) reveals that it accomplishes little toward supporting the study’s conclusion, as discussed below.
】
However, after a deep analysis, the threshold flaw of this argument is that the author makes（has made） an unsubstantiatied assumption that chemicals in the same chemical （可以去掉）family have the same medical effect. As a matter of fact, （或者用according to common sense）there must be lots of chemicals in one chemical family, but only aspirin is chosen to use as a medicine to treat headaches, which means （感觉这两句多余）not all the members in this chemical family（with the same families as aspirin） is （are）capable of treating headaches. Perhaps, it is because of a certain special part of structure in aspirin that makes it useful, not because of aspirin belongs to this chemical family. In this case, without analyzing the exact reason why aspirin is useful in treating headaches, the author can not convince me that salicylates has the same function just because they belong to the same chemical family.

Moreover, the author's conclusion depends on the unfounded basis that the decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in their twenty-year study （太长了，可以不用这么详细，the decline in the number of headaches reported in the study ）is coursed (caused)by the rise in the commercial use of salicylates. This argument overlooks many other possibilities to explain the decline. For instance, it is entirely possible that the environment in this area improved during the past twenty years, or the social pressure is lower than before, even, it might be due to the participants' own treatment (感觉even后面这半句不完整，或者和前面两半句句式差别太大，造成句子成分缺失，似乎应加that the number of headaches reported in the study declines)by other method（可以省去了）. Thus, only the correlation between rise in use of salicylates and decline in number of headaches cannot prove by itself that the latter is just the result of (attributable to) the former. Even if I concede that (不要出现I)the rise in use of salicylates contributes to the decline in number of headaches, it does not mean the use of salicylates as flavor additives will continue to course the same result（take the same effect）. Preservatives and flavor additives are different items. Even with the same chemicals, the effect in human body could be quite different, since the produce procedures, the amount of use, and so on, are different（简练一些because of the different producing procedures，the amount of use，and so on）.

Another assumption upon which the argument rests is that the participants in their study can represent the average citizen（citizens） in Mentia. It is quite possible that people who participant（participate） in this study are thoes(those) who consider health is important, so they pay attention to many facts(facets) in their daily life to avoid the headach. In this case, to establish a strong correlation, the study's sample must be sufficient in size and representative of the overall population of Mentia citizens. Lacking of(去掉) such evidence of a sufficiently representative sample（这小半句可以去掉，有点啰嗦）, the author cannot justifiably rely on the study to draw any conclusion whatever.

In conclusion, （给出照应开头的结论，然后再给出提高的方法the argument is unpersuasive as it stands because of ...）to improve this argument, the author should analyze all alternative possible reasons for the decline of the average number of headaches. Also, strong evidence to prove the sample in the（validity of the） study should be provided to make this argument thoroughly reasonable.
总体不错，就是注意开头和结尾应该给出结论。另外，漏掉了一两个可攻击点，继续加油。

[ 本帖最后由 susanner 于 2009-1-12 16:28 编辑 ]