第四次作业Argument51【Jet小组】

x6xUID: 2180130

第四次作业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:423  TIME:40min  DATE:09/02/2008


The author asserts that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. At first glance, this opinion seems to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection tells me that I cannot agree with it for the following reasons.

In the first place, the author provide unclear procedure of survey. What the speaker really mentioned is a contrast experiment. However, between the test group and control group, the key point is that whether all of the other conditions of the two groups of patients are exactly the same, except the difference of medicine. Actually, we are free from those significant facts. As a result, we cannot deny to question: do patients of the two groups have the same ages( at least similar ages) and physical conditions? Are the illnesses of the patients of the first group  as serious as those of the second group? Can we be insured that there is no difference about  non-medical treatment? And what's more, do Dr.Newland have the same professional background with Dr. Alton? Since so many questions still need to be clearly unanswered, how can we safely accept the author's claim?

In addition, the author make a fallacy of statistics. In the passage, it is mentioned that " their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typical expected."  Reading till this place, questions appears naturally: What does "on average" exactly mean? Image that the typical expected numbers of the patients in a group is 30, however, there is only 15 patiences in real experiment. It follows that the statistical results will be meaningless, since the basic number is totally different.

Last but not least, it seems that the author is too easily get a hasty conclusion - " all patients"  should be used before more careful thinking. Not to mention the problems mentioned above, even if the conditions of the two groups are exactly the same and the experiments results are authentic, the claim is still wrong for the argument uses a few exceptional cases as the basis for the claim about what is true in general.

In sum, the claim of medical newsletter is not convincing as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the author would have to show that the conditions of the two experiment group are free from differences and all statistical data are believable. Additionally, the author must provide evidence of more general results. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal.   

michaelxuywUID: 2330197

The author asserts that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. At first glance, this opinion seems to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection tells me that I cannot agree with it for the following reasons. (开头很简洁，觉得第一句在概述作者的观点时可以稍微变化一下)

In the first place, the author provide unclear procedure of survey.What the speaker really mentioned is a contrast experiment(还有一种说法是controlled experiment). However,between the test(experimental) group and control group, the key point is that whether all of the other conditions of the two groups of patients are exactly the same, except the difference of medicine. Actually, we are free from(free from表达的是“不受……的约束”) those significant facts. As a result, we cannot deny to question: do patients of the two groups have(attain???) the same ages( at least similar ages)and physical conditions? Are the illnesses of the patients of the first group as serious as those of the second group?(另一种表达Do two groups of patients suffered from the same grade of muscle strain???) Can we be insured that there is no difference about non-medical treatment? And what's more, do Dr. Newland have the same professional background with Dr. Alton? Since so many questions still need to be clearly unanswered (answered???), how can we safely accept the author's claim?

In addition, the author make a fallacy of statistics. In the passage,it is mentioned that " their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typical expected."  Reading till this place, questions(主语应该是人，和Reading对应) appears naturally: What does "on average" exactly mean? Image that the typical expected numbers of the patients in a group is 30, however, there is only 15 patiences in real experiment. It follows that the statistical results will be meaningless, since the basic number is totally different.

Last but not least, it seems that the author is too easily get a hasty conclusion - " all patients"  should be used before more careful thinking(consideration???). Not to mention the problems mentioned(有重复，建议换一个) above, even if the conditions of the two groups are exactly the same and the experiments results are authentic, the claim is still wrong for the argument uses a few exceptional cases as the basis for the claim about what is true in general.( 谚语的说法One swallow does not make a summer)

In sum, the claim of medical newsletter is not convincing as it stands.To make it logically acceptable, the author would have to show that the conditions of the two experiment group are free from differences and all statistical data are believable. Additionally, the author must provide evidence of more general results. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal.

总得来说，楼主的这篇文章文思缜密，结构条理清晰，有很多值得我学习的地方。有些用词和句式可以再完善一下，希望我的建议对楼主有帮助。


[ 本帖最后由 michaelxuyw 于 2008-2-10 21:36 编辑 ]

x6xUID: 2180130

感谢 michaelxuyw的修改   我会尽快完成回改的  :)

x6xUID: 2180130

we are free from(free from表达的是“不受……的约束”) those significant facts

改为 we are free from knowing those significant facts
可以吗？
free from
v.
解除
adv.
没有...的

michaelxuywUID: 2330197

free from A 表示的“没有A”，我觉得隐含了“没有A，所以免受A的侵害”意思，至少我看例子有这样的感觉:)。另一种表达可以是：these significant facts are not made available to us.