argument53 Ares战队第四次作业(by garyknight)

garyknightUID: 2227971

53
Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.


    The arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and it continues into later life. To justify this assertion the arguer cites a study with 25 infants from their infancy to adolescence and relates their mild distress with their conceiving time when their mother's production of melatonin increase. However, this argument is unconvincing merely as it stands.
    First of all, the statistical evidence about the research of 25 infants, upon which the argument relies, is too vague to be informative. The number of samples is merely 25, which cannot be representative of all children who showed signs of mild distress. In addition, There is possibility that the 25 distressed infants were born in early fall by coincident. Therefore, it is obviously unpersuasive to assert that all, at least most infants conceived in early autumn have the character of distress. What's more, the arguer fails to provide exact data of control, which should contain number, sex and, the most indispensably, birthday. It is possible that there are also children born in early autumn in the control, which will cause the assumption ambivalent.
    Secondly, the arguer assumes a causal correlationship between the increase of mothers' production of melatonin and children's shyness. According to his evidence, it can merely substantiate a possibility that melatonin can affect infants' brain functions. However, the arguer ignore to prove that influenced brain functions will lead to infant's mild distress and teenagers' shyness, which is the key proof to show that the consequence of increase of melatonin is shyness inevitably. It should be even possible that melatonin causes children's excitement and animation, just opposite to distress which may be resulted from an alternative explanation, such as children's common response to unfamiliar stimulation and improper ways of study.
    Last but not least, the arguer's assertion that half of the studied teenagers showing a sign of shyness is by the factor of increase melatonin. Unfortunately, he/she fails to take into account other possible reasons resulting in teenagers' character. It is commonsense that the family in which children grow up, the education that they receive, the friends they live with, the accidents they may experience and so on should have great influence on children's character. These factors, constructing their living environments, may even give more rise to more than half of the studied children's shyness than melatonin do.
    Summing up, if the arguer intends to strengthen his unconvincing conclusion, he/she should 1) expand the capacity of samples and use proper control; 2) provide exact resource to show that affected brain functions can lead to infants' distress and adolescences' shyness; 3) substantiate the exclusive reason for studied teenagers' signs of distress is the increase of mothers' melatonin.

普洱茶UID: 2220388

The arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and it continues into later life. To justify this assertion the arguer cites a study with 25 infants from their infancy to adolescence and relates their mild distress with their conceiving time when their mother's production of melatonin increase. However, this argument is unconvincing merely as it stands.
    First of all, the statistical evidence about the research of 25 infants, upon which the argument relies, is too vague to be informative. The number of samples is merely 25, which cannot be representative of all children who showed signs of mild distress. In addition, There is possibility that the 25 distressed infants were born in early fall by coincident. Therefore, it is obviously unpersuasive to assert that all, at least most infants conceived in early autumn have the character of distress. What's more, the arguer fails to provide exact data of control, which should contain number, sex and, the most indispensably, birthday. It is possible that there are also children born in early autumn in the control, which will cause the assumption ambivalent.
    Secondly, the arguer assumes a causal correlationship between the increase of mothers' production of melatonin and children's shyness. According to his evidence, it can merely substantiate a possibility that melatonin can affect infants' brain functions. However, the arguer ignore to prove that influenced brain functions will lead to infant's mild distress and teenagers' shyness, which is the key proof to show that the consequence of increase of melatonin is shyness inevitably. It should be even possible that melatonin causes children's excitement and animation, just opposite to distress which may be resulted from an alternative explanation, such as children's common response to unfamiliar stimulation and improper ways of study.
    Last but not least, the arguer's assertion that half of the studied teenagers showing a sign of shyness is by the factor of increase melatonin. Unfortunately, he/she fails to take into account other possible reasons resulting in teenagers' character. It is commonsense that the family in which children grow up, the education that they receive, the friends they live with, the accidents they may experience and so on should have great influence on children's character. These factors, constructing their living environments, may even give more rise to more than half of the studied children's shyness than melatonin do.
    Summing up, if the arguer intends to strengthen his unconvincing conclusion, he/she should 1) expand the capacity of samples and use proper control; 2) provide exact resource to show that affected brain functions can lead to infants' distress and adolescences' shyness; 3) substantiate the exclusive reason for studied teenagers' signs of distress is the increase of mothers' melatonin.
[呵呵,你呢argument现在就写成这种程度么我也没得那样好说啦，唯一说的就是再接再厉拉。这个结尾太帅啦，我都想挨你打六分啦！]