Argument 188（求猛拍）

lemoncolorUID: 2524331

这是今天写的第二篇，依然不限时，估计写了有50分钟，头大，思路逐渐清晰，但是还是写的不顺手，求拍~


题目：ARGUMENT188 - A new report suggests that men and women experience pain very differently from one another, and that doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications. When researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids-a painkiller-to 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, the women reported feeling much less pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women. This research suggests that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. In addition, researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.
字数：422
用时：AM 12:47:35
日期：2009-2-13

In this argument the author recommends that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required and men should be given other kinds of pain medication. The author also recommends that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men. To support these recommendations the author cites several facts that a study show that the women feeling much less pain than the men and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women when researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids to both men and women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted. Even if the author's reasoning seem to attractive, we may still perceive that this argument rests on a series of unconfirmed assumptions, and is therefore unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the study in this argument is unwarranted. The author assumes that kappa opioids caused women's much less pain than men's. Nevertheless the author overlooks other possible factors in causing the result above. Perhaps, women's sensitivity of pain is more sensitive than men's. In short, Unless the author eliminates other factors, this assertion is unconvincing at any way.

In the second place, the author's recommendation that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required and men should be given other kinds of pain medication commits a fallacy of "either-or" reasoning. Nevertheless the two ways above are not necessarily mutually-exclusive alternatives. It is more likely that other possibilities might also contribute to the problem. For instance, it is possible that other pain medicines are more effective for women to relieve pain, or perhaps kappa opioids has side effects that the author doesn't mentioned in the argument. If so, just doing these two means would not solve the problem. In short, without weighing the proposal against alternatives, the author's recommendation is the best means of achieving the efficacy above is utterly unconvincing as it stands.

Finally, another recommendation that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women is problematic. The validity of the recommendation is distrustful lacking information about how could kappa opioids represent all medicines. No evidence provided in this argument to support the kappa opioids's representativeness, and the recommendation is unwarranted at all.

In sum, the author's recommendation reached in this argument is scant of credibility since the evidence cited in the analysis does not offer strong support to what the arguer recommends. To bolster the evidence that kappa opioids could relieve women's pain more effective than men's, the author should eliminate other possibilities such as sensitivity between women and men are different. To assess the recommendation the author should prove the means are unique and kappa opioids could represent all medicines. Otherwise, the argument would be highly unacceptable.