Argument53 【0706G－LOVEAW小组】第十二次作业

welcomebsUID: 2235250

In this argument, the arguer claims that increased levels of melatonin before birth bring about shyness during infancy and later life. To support this claim, the arguer cites a study in which 25 infants showed mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli and when they grow up to teenagers, more than half of them identified themselves as shy. The study also showed that their mothers were more likely to have conceived in early autumn, during which decreased daylight causes increased production of melatonin, which can affect brain functions. Careful scrutiny of this argument, however, reveals it is undermined by several flaws.

To begin with, the arguer fails to convince me of the credibility of the study. The number of subjects---25 infants, may be too small to be representative of the general cases of infants. Maybe many other infants who have been conceived at the same period of year did not show mild distress at all. Without such important information, I can hardly accept the arguer's conclusion.

Another problem with this argument is the questionable result of the follow-up research. Since just more than half of these children reported their shyness, these vague percentage can hardly speak of the sound effect of melatonin in all of these teenagers. Moreover, we can scarcely rely on their own response for they just based on their feeling and may not tell the actual case. Furthermore, there is a good chance that their shyness has come as a result of their character, but not decided by the function of melatonin at all. Without ruling out these and other possible scenarios, the arguer's conclusion would be premature at best.

Even all the foregoing assumptions turn out to be true, the arguer fails to establish the causal relationship between increased melatonin and infants' shyness. The mere fact that increased production of melatonin in a mother is insufficient evidence that it can actually affect the fetus. Maybe that hormone has some bearing on brain funtions of the mother but serve little to the baby. Or perhaps it is other substances which may cause mild distress in babies. Or perhaps the change of seasons cause other minor changes in their mothers' diet, thereby having influnce on their babies. Moreover, Perhaps those infants just felt uncomfortable to external stimuli and mild distress ensued but not the result of their shyness. Each of these possibilities, if true, would turn substantial doubt on the arguer's claim.

To sum up, this argument is not well supported. To strengthen it, the arguer should first draw a more reliable study which can generallly reflect the babies' cases of mild distress. He also needs to provide sound evidence about teenagers' shyness. To better evaluate the argument, I would need the detailed analysis on the true cause of those infants' mild distress.