argument142 [smiles-A] 第四次作业

枫晰UID: 2123661

In this argument, the arguer concludes that a correlation between the high iron levels and heart disease, is most probably .To justify the conclusion, the arguer notes two separate correlations established. However, this argument is problematic in several respects, which make it unconvincing.

In the first place, the arguer equates the risk of heart disease with the cause of heart disease, which are two different conceptions .However, the arguer confuses the conception of the risk of heart disease, just meaning that you have the probability of having the heart disease when having food with high levels of iron, with the conception of the cause of heart disease, which means that the food with high levels of iron will surely lead to the heart disease. In this case, the conclusion is unconvincing

Secondly, even if the increase of heart disease attributes to the large amounts of red meat in diet, yet the arguer unfairly raise the assumption that the high levels of iron in red meat serves to the increase of heart disease. There are other alternative factors that may also effect on the increase of heart disease. Perhaps the increase of the heart disease is totally the affect of another element that have nothing to do with iron, or Perhaps the result of the heart disease is the combined affection of iron and other elements. Without ruling out these possible factors, the conclusion remains unwarranted.

Before I come to my finial conclusion, I would like to point out that the arguer falsely assumed that the large amounts of red meat in diet will lead to the increase of heart disease, while there just a correlation exists according to the argument. After all, the arguer fails to tell us what kind relationship between them. It is entirely possible that the large amounts of the red meat in diet ,in the converse, contribute to the decrease of the heart disease, If so, the arguer is too hasty to draw out the conclusion.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive. Before any finial conclusions are made, the arguer must provide further information about the really relationship between the read meat and heart disease, and the convincing evidence about the really function of the iron do in the red meat to cause the heart disease.

monica98UID: 2124796

In this argument, the arguer concludes that a correlation between the high iron levels and heart disease, is most probably （漏了）.To justify the conclusion, the arguer notes two separate correlations established. However, this argument is problematic in several respects, which make it unconvincing.

In the first place, the arguer equates the risk of heart disease with the cause of heart disease, which are two different conceptions 。However,（这句放首句更好） the arguer confuses the conception of the risk of heart disease, just meaning that you have the probability of having the heart disease when having food with high levels of iron, with the conception of the cause of heart disease, which means that the food with high levels of iron will surely lead to the heart disease. In this case, the conclusion is unconvincing

Secondly, even if the increase of heart disease attributes to the large amounts of red meat in diet, yet the arguer unfairly raise the assumption that the high levels of iron in red meat serves to the increase of heart disease. There are other alternative factors that may also effect on the increase of heart disease. Perhaps the increase of the heart disease is totally the affect of another element that have nothing to do with iron, or Perhaps the result of the heart disease is the combined affection of iron and other elements. Without ruling out these possible factors, the conclusion remains unwarranted.

Before I come to my finial conclusion, I would like to point out that the arguer falsely assumed that the large amounts of red meat in diet will lead to the increase of heart disease, while there just a correlation exists according to the argument. After all, the arguer fails to tell us what kind relationship between them. It is entirely possible that the large amounts of the red meat in diet ,in the converse, contribute to the decrease of the heart disease, If so, the arguer is too hasty to draw out the conclusion.（不是错误，这个关系应该是默认的吧，作者不会弱智到这个地步）

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive. Before any finial conclusions are made, the arguer must provide further information about the really relationship between the read meat and heart disease, and the convincing evidence about the really function of the iron do in the red meat to cause the heart disease

逻辑表达不是很清楚

[ 本帖最后由 monica98 于 2006-7-29 17:26 编辑 ]

xinxinwUID: 2144273

In this argument, the arguer concludes that a correlation between the high iron levels and heart disease, is most probably 没写完吧.To justify the conclusion, the arguer notes two separate correlations established. However, this argument is problematic in several respects, which make it unconvincing.

In the first place, the arguer equates the risk of heart disease with the cause of heart disease, which are two different conceptions .However, the arguer confuses the conception of the risk of heart disease, just meaning that you have the probability of having the heart disease when having food with high levels of iron, with the conception of the cause of heart disease, which means that the food with high levels of iron will surely lead to the heart disease. In this case, the conclusion is unconvincing不是这个意思吧，实在说致病率高，是样本概率，跟理论上的可能性还是有区别的

Secondly, even if the increase of heart disease attributes这个词好像不是这么用 to the large amounts of red meat in diet, yet the arguer unfairly raise the assumption that the high levels of iron in red meat serves to the increase of heart disease. There are other alternative factors that may also effect on the increase of heart disease. Perhaps the increase of the heart disease is totally the affect of another element that have nothing to do with iron, or Perhaps the result of the heart disease is the combined affection of iron and other elements举个例子出来就好得多. Without ruling out these possible factors, the conclusion remains unwarranted.

Before I come to my finial conclusion, I would like to point out that the arguer falsely assumed that the large amounts of red meat in diet will lead to the increase of heart disease, while there just a correlation exists according to the argument. After all, the arguer fails to tell us what kind relationship between them. It is entirely possible that the large amounts of the red meat in diet ,in the converse, contribute to the decrease of the heart disease, If so, the arguer is too hasty to draw out the conclusion.这个点比较偏，我觉得，这样的话就没有攻击结论

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive. Before any finial conclusions are made, the arguer must provide further information about the really relationship between the read meat and heart disease, and the convincing evidence about the really function of the iron do in the red meat to cause the heart disease.

猫猫寿司UID: 2219543

其实大逻辑是这样的：
作者说高铁和心脏病有关
又说吃牛羊肉和心脏病有关
结论高铁和心脏病产生的关系最可能是牛羊肉和心脏病的关系造成的
也就是说，吃牛羊肉吃出来的，具体你去Ａ组作业贴我的下面看一下我一个加拿大朋友的英文解释，有链接