Argument35【0906G 文以载道三月四月作文小组】第1周第1作业 by timon_hacuna

timon_hacunaUID: 2534867

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 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。

提纲：
1、   水杨酸酯与阿司匹林是同一类化合物，并不表明水杨酸酯也可以治疗头痛。
2、  Several decades 与  20-year不是一个时间概念
3、  研究的参与者多少，是否具有普遍性代表性，报告的百分比是多少？是否代表样本的真实情况？

Merely based on a series of unwarranted assumptions and dubious evidence the author comes to a conclusion that with the new use for salicylates ,we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia.On the surface,the argument appears to be logical.However in actuality these evidence alone does not provide compelling support to make the argument sound or reasonable.
The author commits a fallacy in assuming that salicylates are connected with headaches.First of all, he told us that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin,a medicine used to treat headaches,to lead us to draw a conclusion that salicylates are also effective dealing with headches.However there can be hundreds of thousands of metials in one chemical family,they may have something in common ,but they all have their own characters.Therefore it is not enough to the conclusion.
Another flaw that weaken the logic of this argument is that the author fails in offering enough informations about the report.Samples for the survey should be able to prpresent all the people living in M.However,from the summery,we find no sign of such procedures for random samplings.We have good reasons to doult if the sample is reprentative enough to reflect all the residents in M.
The last but not least,if the salicylates have something to do with headache,The writer cannot assuming that the number of people who get a headache are connected with the amout of salicylates in foods.
To sum up,though the argument seems to be plausible,in fact it is nither sound nor persuasive.Not only does it leace out such key issues,but also because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains.To make the argument more convincing,the arguer should provide more information to clear the seemingly reasonable statement.We need more evidence such as the whole chemical family of aspirin are able to treat headachs.Otherwise,the argument is logically unacceptable.

[ 本帖最后由 timon_hacuna 于 2009-1-13 21:36 编辑 ]

sibslccUID: 2463158

Merely based on 不清楚这个词组放在句首是否这么用a series of unwarranted assumptions and dubious evidence the author comes to a conclusion that with the new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. On the surface, the argument appears to be logical逻辑这个词是中性的，这个换成persuasive. However in actuality these evidences alone does not provide compelling support to make the argument sound or reasonable.
The author commits a fallacy in assuming that salicylates are connected with headaches. First of all, he told us that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin,a medicine used to treat headaches, to lead us to draw a conclusion that salicylates are also effective dealing with headches.这块补语补的哪里 However there can be hundreds of thousands of metials in one chemical family. They may have something in common, but they all have their own characters. Therefore it is not enough to (deduce) the conclusion.
Another flaw that weaken the logic of this argument is that the author fails in offering enough informations about the report. Samples for the survey should be able to prpresent all the people living in M(如果决定简写，要在第一次出现时用括号说明一下，例如Menia（M）). However, from the summery, we find no sign of such procedures for random samplings. We have good reasons to doult if the sample is reprentative enough to reflect all the residents in M.
The last but not least, if the salicylates have something to do with headache, The writer cannot assuming that the number of people who get a headache are connected with the amout of salicylates in foods.第三段太短了
To sum up, though the argument seems to be plausible, in fact it is nither sound nor persuasive. Not only does it leace out such key issues, but also because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should provide more information to clear the seemingly reasonable statement. We need more evidence such as the whole chemical family of aspirin are able to treat headachs. Otherwise,the argument is logically unacceptable.

sibslccUID: 2463158

Merely based on 不清楚这个词组放在句首是否这么用a series of unwarranted assumptions and dubious evidence the author comes to a conclusion that with the new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. On the surface, the argument appears to be logical逻辑这个词是中性的，这个换成persuasive. However in actuality these evidences alone does not provide compelling support to make the argument sound or reasonable.

The author commits a fallacy in assuming that salicylates are connected with headaches. First of all, he told us that salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin,a medicine used to treat headaches, to lead us to draw a conclusion that salicylates are also effective dealing with headches.这块补语补的哪里 However there can be hundreds of thousands of metials in one chemical family. They may have something in common, but they all have their own characters. Therefore it is not enough to (deduce) the conclusion.

Another flaw that删除这个词 weaken the logic of this argument is that the author fails in offering enough informations about the report. Samples for the survey should be able to prpresent all the people living in M(如果决定简写，要在第一次出现时用括号说明一下，例如Menia（M）). However, from the summery, we find no sign of such procedures for random samplings. We have good reasons to doult if the sample is reprentative enough to reflect all the residents in M.

The last but not least, if the salicylates have something to do with headache, The writer cannot assuming that the number of people who get a headache are connected with the amout of salicylates in foods.第三段太短了而且没什么攻击点

To sum up, though the argument seems to be plausible, in fact it is nither sound nor persuasive. Not only does it leace out such key issues, but also because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should provide more information to clear the seemingly reasonable statement. We need more evidence such as the whole chemical family of aspirin are able to treat headachs. Otherwise,the argument is logically unacceptable.

楼上，攻击点你还没有说全，漏了一个食品添加剂这一个非常重要的点。这种大的错误点一定要攻击。
提纲，可以多考虑一下
1，攻击调查的可信即代表性。这个例子貌似可以攻击。
2. 有关联不代表因果
3. 食品添加剂这一个
4. 头痛的原因有很多种，可能出现了连吃药都抑制不了的情况
还有可以好好考虑下
你的长句子写得还是不错的