0910AW 同主题写作第七期 Argument167 By eric_scut

eric_scutUID: 2304889

TOPIC: ARGUMENT167 - A folk remedy* for insomnia, the scent in lavender flowers, has now been proved effective. In a recent study, 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept each night for three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room where their sleep was monitored. During the first week, volunteers continued to take their usual sleeping medication. They slept soundly but wakened feeling tired. During the second week, the volunteers discontinued their medication. As a result, they slept less soundly than the previous week and felt even more tired. During the third week, the volunteers slept longer and more soundly than in the previous two weeks. This shows that over a short period of time lavender cures insomnia.
*A folk remedy is usually a plant-based form of treatment common to traditional forms of medicine, ones that developed before the advent of modern medical services and technology.


请看3楼的修改稿
3# eric_scut


以下是原作

WORDS: 383
TIME: 不限
DATE: 2009-7-10 15:23:52

In this argument, the author cites a study about lavender flowers and then concludes that the scent in lavender flowers can effectively cure insomnia. The reasoning seems sound at first glance. However, further examination reveals several fallacies in the argumentation.

First of all, the wakened feeling of the volunteers in the third week is hidden in the study. Because sleeping soundly or not is hard to be measured objectively, the feeling of the volunteers when they waked up plays a more important role in the consideration. Without this information, we can not synthetically contrast the difference between the third week and the other two week, let alone conclusion that in the third week the insomnia of the subjects has been cured.

Another problem of the argument lies in that the change of the sleeping quality of the volunteers may be attributable to some other possibilities, rather than the scent of the lavender flowers. For example, the accommodation of the new environment may be an important factor. Maybe the volunteers were not comfortable to the surroundings in the controlled room at the beginning. Then after two weeks of adjustment, they were able to sleep as they usually did. Or perhaps the sleeping longer and more soundly in the third week was due to their tiredness after two weeks of bad quality of sleep. Even that the medication in the first week still took effect in the next two weeks is possible. Either of these scenarios, if true, would explain the change of the sleeping quality.

Finally, three weeks is too short a duration to claim that the insomnia has been cured. As stated in the above paragraph, there are several possibilities to the change of the soundness of the sleep. The situation of the volunteers in the third week may be just a temporary status. After all, the author do not tells us anything about the patient after the third week. Only if they were not suffering from insomnia any more after the study can we conclude that the scent of the lavender flowers indeed cure their insomnia.

In conclusion, in order to make the argument more convincing, the author should present more detailed information showing that the volunteers were really cured. Besides, he should carry out a more reasonable experiment with a control and ruling out other possibilities of the stimulus.

提纲
It is unconvincing to draw the conclusion from the study above.
1. The study ignores the wakened feeling of the volunteers in the third week.
2. The change of the sleeping quality of the volunteers may due to other factors rather than the lavender scent, for example, the acclimation to the new environment. Or The result of the third week is due to the effect of the medical treatment of the first week. Or too tired after less sleeping in the second week.
3. 3 week is not sufficient to draw the conclusion. Not mention the sleeping quality after the third week. Are they really cured?

danielgaoUID: 2604134

Inthis argument, the author cites a study about lavender flowers and thenconcludes that the scent in lavender flowers can effectively cureinsomnia. The reasoning seems sound at first glance. However, furtherexamination reveals several fallacies in the argumentation.

First ofall, the wakened feeling of the volunteers in the third week is hiddenin the study. Because sleeping soundly or not is hard to be measuredobjectively, the feeling of the volunteers when they waked up plays amore important role in the consideration. Without this information, wecan not synthetically contrast the difference between the third weekand the other two weeks, let alone conclusion(conclude) that in the third week theinsomnia of the subjects has been cured.

Anotherproblem of the argument lies in(on?) that(应该去掉that) the change of the sleeping qualityof the volunteers may be attributable to some other possibilities,rather than the scent of the lavender flowers. For example, theaccommodation of the new environment may be an important factor. Maybethe volunteers were not comfortable to the surroundings in thecontrolled room at the beginning. Then after two weeks of adjustment,they were able to sleep as they usually did. Or perhaps the sleepinglonger and more soundly in the third week was due to their tirednessafter two weeks of bad quality of sleep. Even that the medication inthe first week still took effect in the next two weeks is possible.(本句不通顺)Either of these scenarios, if true, would explain the change of thesleeping quality.

Finally,three weeks is too short a duration to claim that the insomnia has beencured. As stated in the above paragraph, there are severalpossibilities to the (不太通顺， 改成could lead to the 似乎会好点)change of the soundness of the sleep. Thesituation of the volunteers in the third week may be just a temporarystatus. After all, the author do not tells us anything about thepatient after the third week. Only if they were not suffering frominsomnia any more after the study can we conclude that the scent of thelavender flowers indeed cure their insomnia.

Inconclusion, in order to make the argument more convincing, the authorshould present more detailed information showing that the volunteerswere really cured. Besides, he should carry out a more reasonableexperiment with a control and ruling out other possibilities of thestimulus.

提纲
It is unconvincing to draw the conclusion from the study above.
1. The study ignores the wakened feeling of the volunteers in the third week.
2. The change of the sleeping quality of the volunteers may due toother factors rather than the lavender scent, for example, theacclimation to the new environment. Or The result of the third week isdue to the effect of the medical treatment of the first week. Or tootired after less sleeping in the second week.
3. 3 week is not sufficient to draw the conclusion. Not mention thesleeping quality after the third week. Are they really cured?

总体来说反驳的比较充分，但是语言比较生硬，仍需改进

eric_scutUID: 2304889

2# danielgao

lie in 在于
lie on取决于；依赖于；

Even that the medication in the first week still took effect in the next two weeks is possible.
Even甚至；that… 主语从句；is possible表语。语法上好像没有问题吧，不过读起来确实有点拗口。已经改了。


修改稿

In this argument, the author believes that the scent in lavender flowers can effectively cure insomnia. To support this opinion, he cites a recent study in which thirty volunteers with chronic insomnia slept on lavender-scented pillows each night for three weeks in a control room where they were monitored. While this reasoning seems to be sound at first glance, further examination reveals several fallacies in the argumentation.

First of all, the measurements in the three weeks are not the same and not convincing. In the first two weeks, the measurements of the subjects’ sleeping qualities are soundness of sleeping and wakened feeling. While in the third week, the data of which is critical to reach the author's conclusion, the study measured how sound and long the volunteers sleep. With different criteria, we can not synthetically contrast the difference of sleeping ability between the third week and the other two weeks. Moreover, the soundness and tiredness are subjective feelings, which may be influenced by the mental impact of the subjects if given strong psychological signal or implications of the effect of lavender-scented pillows. Thus these unconvincing measurements undermine the argument.

Another fundamental problem of the argument lies in that the study does not have a free standing control group. Without it, we can not rule out the various possibilities that may contribute to the change of the sleeping quality of the volunteers. For example, it is highly possible that the medication taken in the first week would still have effect in the next two weeks. Or perhaps the sleeping longer and more soundly in the third week was due to making up for the sleep they lost in the previous week. Or the accommodation of the new environment may play an important role in affecting the sleeping qualities. In common sense, it is difficult for the volunteers to sleep in a new bed in a difference place at the beginning. Then after two weeks of adjustment, they were able to sleep as well as they usually did at home. Either of these scenarios, if true, would explain the change of the sleeping quality.

Finally, three weeks is too short a duration to claim that the insomnia has been cured. As stated in the above paragraph, there are several possibilities to the change of the soundness of the sleep. The situation of the volunteers in the third week may be just a temporary status. After all, the author do not tells us anything about the sleeping qualities of the patients after the third week. Only if they were not suffering from insomnia any more after the study can we conclude that the scent of the lavender flowers indeed cure their insomnia.

In summary, the assertion that the scent of lavender flowers cure insomnia effectively is based on a problematic study and thus unconvincing. To fortify the strength, the author should present more detailed information showing that the volunteers in the study were really cured by the scent of lavender flowers. Besides, he should carry out a more reasonable experiment with a control group and reasonable measurements.