Argument51【越洋农场战队】morallrey

morallreyUID: 2191298

TOPIC: ARGUMENT51 - The following appeared in a medical newsletter.

"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."
WORDS: 404          TIME: 上午 12:30:00          DATE: 2006-8-7

To support the conclusion that patients who suffer from muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment, the newsletter writer cited in his argument a speculation that secondary infections may shorten the time needed for muscle strain to revive. In addition, to strengthen the hypothesis, the arguer also cited a fact that one group of patients who are treated by taking antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment recovered quicker than normally expected, compared with this group, another group who were given sugar pillars recovered not significantly quicker than the other group. However, a close examination of the reasoning of the argument reveals that it suffers from several logical fallacies, as discussed below.

First and foremost, the treatment of the two group must be not exactly the same as can been seen obviously from the argument. On the one hand, the first group was treated by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, he is very much likely to possess more expertise and experience than the other doctor, Dr.Alton, a general physician, since a sports-medicine doctor might be far more reliable than a general physician in treating muscle injuries which were most probably caused by sports. On the other hand, the treating environment where the two group of people are in was not told in the argument, so, there is the possibility that the first group of injuries live in a suitable house surrounded by green trees breathing out fresh Oxide, while the other group live in a poor environment that curbs the recover of muscle strain. With these hypothesis not ruled out, it is unconvincing to draw certain conclusion from the comparing treatment.

Another problem in the argument involves the vagueness of the word “average”. Before the number of the patients treated is presented, it is unsafely and nonlogical to make any claim from the phenomenon mention in the argument. Perhaps, there are only 5 people in the first group who are slightly damaged, but only 3 persons in the other group who were seriously injured (the extent to which the patients injure was either not clear), the total amount of the patients is, in this case, too scant to be representative to outline a general conclusion.

Last but not least, the arguer has not conformed that the sugar pills taken by the second group of patients do not contain any antibiotics. It is also fairly probable that it contains. If this was the matter, then, the hypothesis would be seriously undermined.

拍砖必回,请战友们指点一二!