ARGUMENT167 =August Rush=小组第4次作业 by wisle

wisleUID：2578616

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.
WORDS: 428
TIME: 00:36:12
DATE: 2009-7-25 下午 10:57:36


再对Argument完成了3次认识后，今晚将A和I连着各写了一篇感受了下，呵呵

6.27 今晚用同样的思路写了A188：https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=989208&extra=

====================================================
The arguer sets up a well-grounded logical link between a recent survey and the conclusion that lavender flowers are effective for insomnia through a successive reasoning. However, it turns out that, if look critically, the feeble buttresses weaken the conclusion.

First, at the end of this reasoning, the suspicion of the hypothesis-lavender curing insomnia has blocked access to the conclusion. By insufficient evidences is it difficult to convince that lavender cures insomnia. It is reasonable to ask whether three weeks time is enough to make a hypothesis while other similar surveys of the effectiveness of one medicine will take one year or more to observe the conditions of volunteers successively. In fact, we also don't know the following condition after the three-week survey. Without cleat illustration on the sleeping conditions of these volunteers, it is unfounded to assume that the lavender cures insomnia. If they remain insomnia, the hypothesis is incorrect. Insofar as these concerns can be eliminated, the correlation between the hypothesis and the conclusion is defensible.

Then, by looking back to the line of reasoning, our attentions focus on the analysis of the survey itself. Possibly correct though it remains to be, we can boldly question that the reasoning from the result of survey to the hypothesis, since the vague illustrations on the third week. I cannot help opining that these volunteers sleeping longer and more soundly is caused by the former two weeks, because they didn't sleep well in former two weeks. Let us assume, if a healthy people didn't sleep well even five days, he or she will sleep soundly at the sixth day. Albeit these volunteers had chronic insomnia, they also could not experience a long period time, such as two week, with less sound sleep. Without further plausible explanation for this potential factor, the survey is crippling.

Finally, even if we can forgo these assumptions already stated previously, the illation of the survey is still open to doubt. A point worth pondering is that the survey didn't set up a control group, which is essential for making a hypothesis. Without the results from control group, it is reasonable to assume that these volunteers with chronic insomnia without lavender pillow had the same conditions like those who had. It then stands to reason that the lavender is useless for insomnia. So the survey is a far cry from being proved.

Simply put, the evidences cited in this argument are not competent to bolster this conclusion. After all, an incorrect conclusion will mislead the public rather that gain a big step in treatment of insomnia.