Argument203 【challenge yourself小组】第二次作业

xomaeUID：2468629

ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."



提纲:
1,S医院不一定比M经济
2，S服务态度不一定比M好
3，即便S比M经济，服务态度好，也不能说小的比大的好

In the argument, the author concludes that small hospital is more econamical and of better quality of treatment than in big one,to strengthen his conclusion, he cites a survey indagated a small, nonprofit hospital and a large for-profit hospital, at first glance of this argument, it seems somewhat convincing. However, further reflections reveal that it is a poor one. after a few minutes scanning, i found this argument suffers three logical flaws.

The first, the author's claim that the small hospital have economical advantage contrasting with the bigger one is  not well-founded. For profit is a factor of not only cost, but also revenue, it is true that the hospital in the town of Saluda is non-profit, but if its cost is much higher than the revenue of the big hospital in the city of Megavile, patients would pay more money to the small hospital than the big one, the result be opposition of the author predict. Therefore, unless the author provide the absolutely number of money patients spend on their cure, he can not claim that.

The second, It is a absurd recommendation while the author infers that S have the better treatment than M in the case of no compelling evidence has been offered. The author points that S hospital has more employees per patients and its number of patients is about twice that of the M hospital in favor of his claim, based on serious consideration we will found there is few relation between the causes and conclusion. patients go to S hospital may just because its lower price than M hospital, or perhaps most the employees in S hospital is unemployed, doing work in this hospital only because their desire to spend spare time, if so, they may do work half-hearted, then how could the author conclude that more patients will bring better treatment? He also cite the result of a study indagating the patients' opinion at local hospital and educes the conclusion that there are few complaints, but without the statistical study in M hospital, it is possible that all patients treated in M hospital are really satisfied. Without ruling out these possible factors, the author can not conclude his claim hurriedly.

Finally, Even if S hospital is more economical and of better treatment than M hospital, he can not infer smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and better treatment than the bigger one. It is entirely possible that S hospital is at the suburban area where competition inexistence, the small hospital in other place is under the stress of a lot of other strength hospitals. Thus, lacking more marketing information about nationalwide, it is hard for me to access the author's recommendation.

To sum up, the author fails to strengthen his claim that smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and better treatment than the bigger one.Because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what he maintains. To make this argument more convincing, the author should provide more information about differences and sameness between S and M, additionally, he would demonstrate that S and M are the representive of other hospitals. Therefore, if the argument contains above factors, it will be more convincing.

[ 本帖最后由 xomae 于 2008-7-26 16:06 编辑 ]

小火龙33UID：2448175

In the argument, the author concludes that small hospital is more econamical and of better quality of treatment than in(不用in) big one,to strengthen his conclusion, he cites a survey indagated a small, nonprofit hospital and a large for-profit hospital, at first glance of this argument, it seems somewhat convincing. However, further reflections reveal that it is a poor one. after a few minutes scanning, i found this argument suffers three logical flaws.

The first, the author's claim that the small hospital have economical advantage(s) contrasting with the bigger one is  not well-founded. For profit is a factor of not only cost, but also revenue(不太理解呢）, it is true that the hospital in the town of Saluda is non-profit, but if its cost is much higher than the revenue of the big hospital in the city of Megavile, patients would pay more money to the small hospital than the big one, the result be opposition of(to) the author predict. Therefore, unless the author provide the absolutely number of money patients spend on their cure, he can not claim that.

The second, It is a absurd recommendation while the author infers that S have the better treatment than M in the case of no compelling evidence has been offered. The author points that S hospital has more employees per patients and its number of patients is about twice that of the M hospital in favor of his claim, based on serious consideration we will found there is few relation between the causes and conclusion. patients go to S hospital may just because its lower price than M hospital, or perhaps most the employees in S hospital is unemployed, doing work in this hospital only because their desire to spend spare time, if so, they may do work half-hearted, then how could the author conclude that more patients will bring better treatment? He also cite the result of a study indagating the patients' opinion at local hospital and educes the conclusion that there are few complaints, but without the statistical study in M hospital, it is possible that all patients treated in M hospital are really satisfied. Without ruling out these possible factors, the author can not conclude his claim hurriedly.

Finally, Even if S hospital is more economical and of better treatment than M hospital, he can not infer smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and（have) better treatment than the bigger one. It is entirely possible that S hospital is at the suburban area where competition inexistence, the small hospital in other place is under the stress of a lot of other strength hospitals. Thus, lacking more marketing information about nationalwide, it is hard for me to access the author's recommendation.

To sum up, the author fails to strengthen his claim that smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and better treatment than the bigger one.Because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what he maintains. To make this argument more convincing, the author should provide more information about differences and sameness between S and M, additionally, he would demonstrate that S and M are the representive of other hospitals. Therefore, if the argument contains above factors, it will be more convincing.

这种思路很新颖哈！一般看到的都是针对四个错误逐个攻击，作者却进行了归纳，显得比较简洁很清晰

xomaeUID：2468629

the author's claim that the small hospital have economical advantage(s) contrasting with the bigger one is  not well-founded. For profit is a factor of not only cost, but also revenue

作者对比校医院和大医院后称小医院有经济优势的声称是没有根据的，因为利润不仅和成本有关，还和收入有关。  反了反了 应该是不仅和收入有关 还和成本有关...不知道写的对不对