[you are not alone ]小组习作 Argument 53

Luise8891UID: 2906459

In this argument, the arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth lead to shyness during infancy and later life.
To substantiate his conclusion, he cited a group reaserch of 25 infants which seemingly proves that melatonin made a big difference on the formation of infants' and children’s distress.
However, there are several fallacies in the line of reasoning.

In the first place, inadequate evidence has been provided to prove that melatonin caused distress during infancy.
Firstly, the arguer fails to give evidence to rule out the possibility that almost all infants would show signs of mild distress when exposed to unfalmiliar stimuli.
If that is the case, there is no way that the arguer could conclude that there is only one factor-- melatonin that leads to this.
Secondly, the numble of infants in this research seems too small.
There might be quite a lot
infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamilia stimuli and also were not born in August.
Thirdly, even if it is true that infants who had that symptoms were mostly born in August, still the assumption that since the mothers’ production of melatonin would naturally increase in August, it’s the melatonin that caused the distress during infancy is unfounded without ruling out other factors that might contribute to the distress.
To better validate his conclusion, the arguer needs to provide cogent evidence to prove that most infants with the easily-aroused distress are born in August and also rule out other factors that might affect the research.

In the second place, even if it has been validated that it is indeed the melatonin that is responsible for the distress of infants, it seems a little hasty for the arguer to assums that the melatonin also caused the shyness of the infants’ later life.
First, that fact that half of these infants in the research showed signs of shyness does not lend strong support to the assumption that melatonin continues to affec the formation of character in these infants’ later life. Maybe due to a lot of reason, among not only the children in the study but also other children, the propotion of children who show signs of shyness is quite high.
Then, the arguer fails to rule out other factors that we tend to blame for the shyness of children, such as the lack of care from the busy parents, lack of exposure in public due to the iaolated way of recreation like playing computer games and watching television, etc.
Finally, no evidence has been given to show the level of melatonin in these children.
Do children synthesize melatonin themselves or consume the storage of melatonin which they gained from their mother when they were still embryos.
In short, the arguer needs to provide more evidence to prove that the level of melatonin in these children is quite high, and also to rule out other factors.

In sum, this argument is not well reasoned. To make his conclusion sound more compelling, he needs to do a further research to cover more children with sign of shyness.
Then it would be more convincing, if evidence has been given to rule out common factors which we usually consider as the cause to the formation of shyness.

dreamerdanceUID: 2759402

In this argument, the arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth lead to shyness during infancy and later life. To substantiate his conclusion, he cited a group reaserch
research of 25 infants which seemingly proves that melatonin made a big difference on the formation of shyness of (in) infants and children.
个人认为这里的children指代不明，你要说的是那些婴儿时期melatonin就高的孩子长大后的情况而不是所有儿童，建议可以改为 made a big difference on the formation of children shyness both in their infant and teenage periods.我觉得会更好。不过问题不大However, there are several fallacies in the line of reasoning.

In the first place, inadequate evidence has been provided
我总感觉用has been是肯定的意味，这样用的话会削弱你否定的意思。我建议改为 there is no adequate evidence provided 你觉得是不是更好？to prove that melatonin caused distress during infancy. Firstly, the arguer fails to give evidence to rule out the possibility that almost all infants would show signs of mild distress when exposed to unfalmiliar
（unfamiliar）stimuli. If that is the case, there is no way that the arguer could conclude 这里的语言不是很好，不如说 it is too arbitrary for the arguer to conclude that there is only one factor-- melatonin that leads to this response.句子要完整，this不能单独指代 Secondly, the numble（number） of infants in this research seems too small 建议用limited更好. There might be quite a lot of infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli and also were not born in August 强烈建议用early autumn，不同国家秋天可不都是八月份啊. 另外，建议把were not born in 移到who 后边，因为这个是句子的主干，你要强调有些婴儿虽然不是在早秋出生，但是也有反映。放在前面会有强调的作用。Thirdly, even if it is true that infants who had that symptoms were mostly born in August同上, still the assumption that since the mothers’ production of melatonin would naturally increase in August, it’s the melatonin that caused the distress during infancy
这句话太冗长，本来这一堆就是做assumption的定语的，这样使得句子很难懂，建议改为assumption that mothers’ increased production of melatonin in early autumn would cause the distress during infancy is unfounded without ruling out other factors 这个第三点要说的是哪个呢？你只说other factors 到底是什么呢，没有说清楚啊，没有力度that might contribute to the distress. To better validate his conclusion, the arguer needs to provide cogent evidence to prove that most infants with the easily-aroused distress are born in August and also rule out other factors that might affect the research.
除了第三点以外，其余两点都很不错，先说有可能所有的婴儿都会有这种反应，就着说样本不具有代表性，可能另外一些婴儿也有害羞反应但不是早秋出生的。

In the second place, even if it has been validated that it is indeed the melatonin that is responsible for the distress of infants, it seems a little hasty for the arguer to assumes
（assumes）that the melatonin also caused the shyness of the infants’ later life. First, that （the）fact that half of these infants in the research showed signs of shyness does not lend strong support to the assumption that melatonin continues to affect the formation of character in these infants’ later life你不觉得这句和主题句几乎说的是一样的么？.
Maybe due to a lot of reason, among not only the children in the study but also other children, the propotion （proportion）of children who show signs of shyness is quite high.你是想说可能所有这个年龄的孩子都会害羞吧，但是这句话表达的不太明确啊什么叫a lot of reason? Then, the arguer fails to rule out other factors that we tend to blame for the shyness of children, such as the lack of care from the busy parents, lack of exposure in public due to the iaolated（isolated） way of recreation like（such as）
playing computer games and watching television, etc. 这点很好Finally, no evidence has been given to show the level of melatonin in these children. Do
（could it be possible that）children synthesize melatonin themselves or consume the storage of melatonin which they gained from their mothers when they were still embryos？ In short, the arguer needs to provide more evidence to prove that the level of melatonin in these children is quite high, and also to
删掉rule out other factors.
这段主要说没有证据证明会延续到他们后来的生活，分为三点：第一，可能所有孩子都有这个症状。第二。其他因素，父母，娱乐。第三。孩子是否会自己合成或者用光还不知道，没有明确的这种激素的多少
In sum, this argument is not well reasoned. To make his conclusion sound more compelling, he needs to do a further research to cover more children with sign of shyness. Then it would be more convincing, if evidence has been given to rule out common factors which we usually consider as the cause to
（of）the formation of shyness.

逻辑很不错，段落也很清晰，我改的主要都是一些语言问题，有的也不是什么问题，只是我觉得换一种说法能更地道并且更好的表达你的观点。注意语言的流畅性和准确性，把他修炼的更地道一些。
加油，有什么问题咱俩再交流

Luise8891UID: 2906459

In this argument, the arguer concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth lead to shyness during infancy and later life. To substantiate his conclusion, he cited a group research of 25 infants which seemingly proves that melatonin made a big difference on the formation of shyness during infancy and later childhood.
However, there are several fallacies in the line of reasoning.

In the first place, there is no adequate evidence provided to prove that melatonin caused distress during infancy.
Firstly, the arguer fails to give evidence to rule out the possibility that almost all the infants would show signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli. If that is the case, then it is too arbitrary for the arguer to conclude
that there is only one factor-- melatonin that leads to this
response.
Secondly, the number of infants in this research seems too limited.
There might be quite a lot of
infants who were not born in early autumn but showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli.
Thirdly, even if it is true that infants who had that symptoms were mostly born around the same time, still the assumption that natually increased production of melatonin of pregnant women in early autumn would cause the distress during infancy, is unfounded without ruling out other factors that might contribute to the distress, such as other relevant hormones or prenatal education etc. To better validate his conclusion, the arguer needs to provide cogent evidence to prove that most infants with the easily-aroused distress are born around approximate time and also rule out other factors that might affect the research.

In the second place, even if it has been validated that it is the melatonin that
is responsible for the distress of infants, it seems a little hasty for the arguer to assume that the melatonin also caused the shyness of the infants’ later life.

First, the fact that half of these infants in the research showed signs of shyness does not lend strong support to the assumption that melatonin continues to affect the formation of character in these infants’ later life.
Maybe a large proportion of children of this age show their shyness due to a bunch of social factors.
Then, the arguer fails to rule out other factors that we tend to blame for the shyness of children, such as the lack of care from the busy parents, lack of exposure in public due to the isolated way of recreation
such as playing computer games and watching television, etc.
Finally, no evidence has been given to show the level of melatonin in these children.
Could it be possible that children synthesize melatonin themselves or consume the storage of melatonin which they gained from their mothers when they were still embryos？ In short, the arguer needs to provide more evidence to prove that the level of melatonin in these children is quite high, and also rule out other factors.

In sum, this argument is not well reasoned. To make his conclusion sound more compelling, he needs to do a further research to cover more children with sign of shyness. Then it would be more convincing, if evidence has been given to rule out common factors which we usually consider as the cause of the formation of shyness.