Argument203【0906G背水一战三月小组】第4次作业 by yunfeiyang4ever

yunfeiyang4everUID：2604917

欢迎大家指点！！！

【攻击】1. 两家医院的病人住院天数没有可比性，有可能由于小医院资源有限，使得病人没好就走了，住院时间自然少；
           2. 治愈率是2倍也不说明问题，一般来讲，人们有重病都会去大医院，有小病会去小医院，重病比小病难治疗，而且作者也没有给治疗数量，有可能小医院治疗人数少；
           3. 医务人员数量多不说明问题，水平才是关键；而且大医院的医疗设备先进，医疗保障更好等等；投诉少不说明问题，有可能大家对大医院更挑剔，也有可能小医院没反馈；

【原文】
    The newspaper story concludes that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is more economical and of greater quality than that in larger, for-profit hospitals. To support this conclusion the author compares two hospitals: the average length patient's stay in Saluda is shorter than that in Megaville; also, the cure rate and employees per patient in Saluda is higher than those in Megeville while it has few complaints in Saluda. However, this argument is based on faulty reasoning and a complete lack of evidence to support its conclusion.

    Firstly, the author relies on the assumption that the shorter average length of patient's stay indicates the better quality. It is entirely possible that resources in smaller hospitals are constricted and limited. For that matter, there is no sufficient bed to accommodate all patients. Hence the hospital sends patients who have not recovered to home in order to freeing up more beds for other patients. Without accounting for these possibilities, the author cannot convince me that the treatment in smaller hospitals is better quality than that in larger hospitals.

    Secondly, the mere fact that cure rate in the Saluda is twice that of the Megaville also cannot prove the conclusion that there is better quality treatment in smaller hospitals. In one sense, the author fails to provide the number of patients in two hospitals. Perhaps the quantity of patients in Megaville is much more than that in Sadule. In another sense, common sense informs me that people who suffer from curable problems prefer to go to larger hospitals instead of smaller hospitals, and the physic of curable problems is more complicated than that of slight problems which lead to the cure rate in larger hospitals is lower than that in smaller hospitals. Without ruling out all other requisite factors it is unfair to conclude the better quality treatment in smaller hospitals.

    Finally, the incomplete comparison of employees and complaints in two hospitals is a misleading assertion that could not be tested. As we know, the capability of the hospital's employees, not the number of it, is essential to the quality of the health care. In addition, the physical equipments in larger hospitals are more advanced than that in smaller hospitals, which can afford better quality treatment for patients. Also, the comparison of complaints cannot justify the conclusion. Perhaps patients cavil about larger hospitals due to its for-profitable. Or perhaps the employees in Sadule do not feedback the complaint to administer. Without ruling out such scenarios, the author cannot establish the conclusion.

    To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the newspaper story does not lend strong support to what the author maintained. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to produce more direct comparison concerning on the impression of the health care for two hospitals before jumping to the conclusion. Furthermore, to assess the argument, we would need more information about the competence of the employees and causes of complaints in two hospitals.

yang1989UID：2534880

The newspaper story (不要说是story吧，article就好) concludes that the treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is more economical and of greater quality than that in larger, for-profit hospitals. To support this conclusion the author compares two hospitals: the average length patient's stay in Saluda is shorter than that in Megaville; also, the cure rate and employees per patient in Saluda is higher than those in Megeville while it has few complaints in Saluda. However, this argument is based on faulty reasoning and a complete lack of evidence to support its conclusion.嗯，很好，开头列举出了几个关键错误，并且后文都以它展开。

    Firstly, the author relies on the assumption that the shorter average length of patient's stay indicates the better quality. It is entirely possible that resources in smaller hospitals are constricted and limited. For that matter,it is possible that there is no sufficient bed to accommodate all patients. Hence the hospital sends patients who have not recovered to home in order to freeing up more beds for other patients. Without accounting for these possibilities, the author cannot convince me that the treatment in smaller hospitals is better quality than that in larger hospitals.

    Secondly, the mere fact that cure rate in the Saluda is twice that of the Megaville also cannot prove the conclusion that there is better quality treatment in smaller hospitals. In one sense, the author fails to provide the number of patients in two hospitals. Perhaps the quantity of patients in Megaville is much more than that in Sadule. In another sense, common sense informs me that people who suffer from curable problems prefer to go to larger hospitals instead of smaller hospitals, and the physic of curable problems is more complicated than that of slight problems which lead to the cure rate in larger hospitals is lower than that in smaller hospitals. Without ruling out all other requisite factors it is unfair to conclude the better quality treatment in smaller hospitals.

    Finally, the incomplete comparison of employees and complaints in two hospitals is a misleading assertion that could not be tested trusted. As we know, the capability of the hospital's employees, not the number of it, is essential to the quality of the health care. In addition, the physical equipments in larger hospitals are more advanced than that in smaller hospitals, which can afford better quality treatment for patients. Also, the comparison of complaints cannot justify the conclusion. Perhaps patients cavil about(at或者不要介词) larger hospitals due to its for-profitable. Or perhaps the employees in Sadule do not feedback the complaint to administer. Without ruling out such scenarios, the author cannot establish the conclusion.

    To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the newspaper story does not lend strong support to what the author maintained. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to produce more direct comparison concerning on the impression of the health care for two hospitals before jumping to the conclusion. Furthermore, to assess the argument, we would need more information about the competence of the employees and causes of complaints in two hospitals.

嗯，很好的一篇argument.每段攻击的谬误都很明确，也指出了合理可信的他因。过度自然流畅。对部分词语的用法略加注意就好。
唉，我发现我每次都把argument弄得过于复杂了，向你学习咯～