[Big Fish]03月06日Argument81--By Sansouci

SansouciUID: 2755036

3.06Argument No.81

Allergies are an overreaction of the immune system to certain stimuli.
One view is that allergies can develop as the result of childhood exposure
to certain irritants, such as dust or animal dander, while the immune
system is not yet mature. Another view is that exposure to particular
bacteria early in childhood actually triggers the proper development of
the immune system, and that limiting exposure to these bacteria through
excessive hygiene can cause children's immune systems to overreact to
certain irritants later on. A new study supports the second view: children
who are washed especially frequently and whose parents clean their homes
especially frequently are more likely to develop allergies than are other
children. So in order to reduce the incidence of allergies in children and
adults, parents should not limit children's exposure to irritants or
bacteria.

In this analysis, the arguer suggests that parents should not circumscribe their kids’ exposure to bacteria in order that children and adults are able to reduce the incidence of allergies. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer gives two controversy views about that allergies are an overreaction of the immune system to certain stimuli. Additionally, the author cites a new study certificates that children who are washed especially frequently are more likely to develop allergies than are other children. This argument is unconvincing for several critical fallacies.

First of all, the author commits a fallacy of hasty generalization. The author simply equates frequent wash and home cleaning with excessive hygiene, however, recurrent wash and home cleaning is not a good indication of excessive hygiene. There are basic differences between them, pay attention to maintain clean is a normal live habit, but excessive hygiene is a strictly higher level to keep personal cleaning, thus frequent wash and cleaning could not be properly used to illustrate excessive hygiene. The author ought to make careful and clear differentiation between maintain cleaning and excessive hygiene before we could evaluate if the inference that is justified.

What’s more, the author fails to provide proper information about the incidence of allergies of the two groups of children when they grow up in illustrating that parents should not limit children's exposure to irritants is better. The author only informs us that allergies can or cannot develop depends childhood exposure to certain irritants but what we care more about is that when these children grow up, the incidence of allergies which is not provided by the author. Whether two groups of children is congenital physical well and active personality are needed for us to assess the soundness of the argument, and the conclusion would vary greatly when other conditions varied. For lack of detailed information about the two groups of children when they grow up we can hardly evaluate the conclusion is convincible.

At last, in claiming that limiting children’s exposure to dangerous irritants or bacteria to some extent would still be necessary. The author needs to do more comprehensive research on both positive and negative effects of the proposal. Although the proposal could be adopted to reduce the incidence of allergies in children and adults to a certain degree, however, carrying out the proposal may actually bring about more harmful effects. More bacteria would be brought in children’s corporal and badly affected children immune system which is not complete. This necessary point ignored by the author. Under such scenario, adopting the author’s proposal would harm, rather than benefit, in order to decrease the incidence of allergies in children and adults.

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the auger would have to demonstrate that careful and clear differentiation between maintain cleaning and excessive hygiene. Furthermore, the incidence of allergies of the two groups of children when they grow up should be given. The author must provide evidence to rule out the conclusion is actually useful and necessary.

rokre2ttUID: 2714355

Allergies are an overreaction of the immune system to certain stimuli.
One view is that allergies can develop as the result of childhood exposure
to certain irritants, such as dust or animal dander, while the immune
system is not yet mature. Another view is that exposure to particular
bacteria early in childhood actually triggers the proper development of
the immune system, and that limiting exposure to these bacteria through
excessive hygiene can cause children's immune systems to overreact to
certain irritants later on. A new study supports the second view: children
who are washed especially frequently and whose parents clean their homes
especially frequently are more likely to develop allergies than are other
children. So in order to reduce the incidence of allergies in children and
adults, parents should not limit children's exposure to irritants or
bacteria.

In this analysis, the arguer suggests that parents should not circumscribe their kids’ exposure to bacteria in order that children and adults are able to reduce the incidence of allergies. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer gives two controversy views about that allergies are an overreaction of the immune system to certain stimuli. Additionally, the author cites a new study certificates that children who are washed especially frequently are more likely to develop allergies than are other children. This argument is unconvincing for several critical fallacies.

First of all, the author commits a fallacy of hasty generalization. The author simply equates frequent wash and home cleaning with excessive hygiene, however, recurrent wash and home cleaning is not a good indication of excessive hygiene. There are basic differences between them, pay attention to maintain clean is a normal live habit, but excessive hygiene is a strictly higher level to keep personal cleaning, thus frequent wash and cleaning could not be properly used to illustrate excessive hygiene.(这个关于差异的解释好) The author ought to make careful and clear differentiation between maintain cleaning and excessive hygiene before we could evaluate if the inference that is justified.

What’s more, the author fails to provide proper information about the incidence of allergies of the two groups of children when they grow up in illustrating that parents should not limit children's exposure to irritants is better. The author only informs us that allergies can or cannot develop depends childhood exposure to certain irritants but what we care more about is that when these children grow up, the incidence of allergies which is not provided by the author. Whether two groups of children is congenital physical well and active personality are needed for us to assess the soundness of the argument, and the conclusion would vary greatly when other conditions varied. For lack of detailed information about the two groups of children when they grow up we can hardly evaluate the conclusion is convincible.（我发现我都没看懂题，这一点就没看得出来。。。）

At last, in claiming that limiting children’s exposure to dangerous irritants or bacteria to some extent would still be necessary. The author needs to do more comprehensive research on both positive and negative effects of the proposal. Although the proposal could be adopted to reduce the incidence of allergies in children and adults to a certain degree, however, carrying out the proposal may actually bring about more harmful effects. More bacteria would be brought in children’s corporal and badly affected children immune system which is not complete. This necessary point ignored by the author. Under such scenario, adopting the author’s proposal would harm, rather than benefit, in order to decrease the incidence of allergies in children and adults.

To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the auger would have to demonstrate that careful and clear differentiation between maintain cleaning and excessive hygiene. Furthermore, the incidence of allergies of the two groups of children when they grow up should be given. The author must provide evidence to rule out the conclusion is actually useful and necessary.
这个题我感觉不好理解，从这道题里找出来三个点已经很不错了，可惜我只能找到一处，还感觉没表达好。先学习了