Argument38 =August Rush=小组第3次作业 by wisle

wisleUID: 2578616

套上自己的模板，第一次还有点陌生~!
(@.@)


The arguer affirms that the daily use of Ichthaid deriving from fish oil makes a great contribution to our health, meanwhile decreases the frequency of absenteeism. To substantiate this assertion, the arguer cites numerous fish consumption in East Meria, few times people visiting doctor because of cold treatment basing on eating substantial amount of fish preventing cold and the cold making up most of absenteeism reason. Albeit the assertion is ostensibly well-grounded at first glance, it just skims the surface of the problem in general rather than takes diverse circumstances into consideration. Consequently, the scarcity of indispensable evidence weakens the assertion.

The threshold suspicion lies on the case that the relationship of substantial fish and few times people caught cold. Possible though it entirely remain to be, the argument provides scant evidence to bolster this assumption, which likely leads us to assume that better healthy condition in East Meria may be essential from their healthy living conventions and food diet. For example, a person has less pressure with a regulated and rational food diet will be far from cold. Except for the former reason, it cannot help opining that few times people visiting doctor doesn’t mean few cold people caught in this area. As we know, if we catch a lightly cold, we will not go to clinic and it’s also unnecessary to visit doctor as soon as we feel cold, since immune system in our bodies can works well. In the realm where these concerns can be eliminated, the correlation between numerous amount of fish consumption and less cold or better health is more defensible.

Then our focus transfer to the analysis of cold making up most of absenteeism reason. Even though the fact that less cold caused by eating fish is acceptable, it is difficult to persuade that absenteeism is caused by cold via insufficient evidence. An appropriate suspicion stems from real reasons which lead to absenteeism. Perhaps, employees are intend to have a rest under such a pressure, but they have no another alternatives instead of asking days off as cold, so that they may tell lies rather than catch colds in reality. Without further founded explanation for this potential element, the conclusion that major part of absenteeism stems from cold is cripple.

At last, even if we can forgo the assumptions which are already stated previously, the illation that the Ichthaid, deriving from fish oil, is effective as eating fish is still open to doubt. Without clear explanation on which element help to improve our immune, we can boldly speculate that Ichthaid, a product of fish oil, doesn’t contain this effective element which could prevent colds. Moreover, another point worth pondering is that maybe sole or several elements have nothing to do with health without assisting other elements from other foods. Therefore, under this uncertain circumstance, that daily use of Ichthaid is helpful to prevent colds is a far cry from being proved, which render the conclusion unwarranted.

Indubitably, water is to fish what powerful evidence is to assertion. Notwithstanding, the evidences cited in the argument are not competent for enhancing the assertion foundation. Therefore, I will suspend my judgment about the credibility of the assertion until the arguer can provide concrete evidence that eating fish directly lead few colds, most of absenteeism consisted of really catching cold, Ichthaid equal to the effectiveness of eating fish. Otherwise, this indefensible assertion is unacceptable.

crepuscularlywUID: 2645654

附件