argument166

Ocean~SprayUID: 2847693

TOPIC: ARGUMENT166 - The following appeared in a local newspaper.

"People should not be misled by the advertising competition between Coldex and Cold-Away, both popular over-the-counter cold medications that anyone can purchase without a doctor's prescription. Each brand is accusing the other of causing some well-known, unwanted side effect: Coldex is known to contribute to existing high blood pressure and Cold-Away is known to cause drowsiness. But the choice should be clear for most health-conscious people: Cold-Away has been on the market for much longer and is used by more hospitals than is Coldex. Clearly, Cold-Away is more effective."
WORDS: 375
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-7-26 16:25:44

The argument concludes that patients should choose the over-the-counter cold medications Cold-Away (CA) instead of Coldex (C). To support this contention the author provides the competition between the two medicines that both may cause unwanted side effects, and the fact that CA's more popular and occupy the market longer than C. However, careful consideration reveals several logical flaws, which makes the argument unsound as it stands.

To begin with, the author points out that each brand is accusing the other of causing some unwanted side effect. Yet he fails to provide evidence that the two brands are competing fairly and their attacks are worth trust. Even if the unwanted side effects of both medicines are true, to draw any conclusion with this support seems harsh and invalid, because we are not informed what degree each of the side effect may cause. Without specific evidences, this fact proves none of the conclusion.

In addition, the argument lies on the unpersuasive assumption that CA is more effective than C merely on the facts that CA has been on the market for long time and has been adopted by more hospitals than C. However, the time of staying on the market does not equal the effectiveness, maybe the younger C learn from the CA and remove some of its shortcomings and add some unseen advantages. Furthermore, the popularity among the hospitals does not prove CA's effectiveness, either. Perhaps hospitals are accustomed to the old medicine, or perhaps the hospitals are considering alter to C, or perhaps the C brings the doctors more profits. Without eliminating these possibilities, the argument is unpersuasive.

Finally, the arguer deliberately makes a one-of-two choice that except the C and CA, there are no other over-the-counter cold medications available, which cannot be deduced from the argument. There are possibilities that there a myriad of cold medication, and others have more effectiveness and less side effects.

To sum up, to make the argument sounder, the arguer has to provide more evidences that the CA's side-effects are less than that of the C's; and that the effectiveness is better that C as well. Furthermore, he has to prove that the longer time on the market and the more popularity on earth indicate the effectiveness of CA.

alickenUID: 2845947

The argument concludes that patients should choose the over-the-counter cold medications Cold-Away (CA) instead of Coldex (C). To support this contention the author provides the competition between the two medicines that both may cause unwanted side effects, and the fact that CA's more popular and occupy the market longer than C. However, careful consideration reveals several logical flaws, which makes the argument unsound as it stands.

To begin with, the author points out that each brand is accusing the other of causing some unwanted side effect. Yet he fails to provide evidence that the two brands are competing fairly and their attacks are worth trust. Even if the unwanted side effects of both medicines are true, to draw any conclusion with this support seems harsh and invalid, because we are not informed what degree each of the side effect may cause. Without specific evidences, this fact proves none of the conclusion.

In addition, the argument lies on the unpersuasive assumption that CA is more effective than C merely on the facts that CA has been on the market for long time and has been adopted by more hospitals than C. However, the time of staying on the market does not equal the effectiveness, maybe the younger C learn(learns) from the CA and remove some of its shortcomings and add some unseen advantages. Furthermore, the popularity among the hospitals does(can) not prove CA's effectiveness, either. Perhaps hospitals are accustomed to the old medicine, or perhaps the hospitals are considering alter to C, or perhaps the C brings the doctors more profits. Without eliminating these possibilities, the argument is unpersuasive.

Finally, the arguer deliberately makes a one-of-two choice that except the C and CA, there are no other over-the-counter cold medications available, which cannot be deduced from the argument. There are possibilities that there a myriad of cold medication, and others have more effectiveness and less side effects.
(这篇argu应该不能攻击这个错，因为作者只是在讨论C 和 CA谁更有效)

To sum up, to make the argument sounder, the arguer has to provide more evidences that the CA's side-effects are less than that of the C's; and that the effectiveness is better that C as well. Furthermore, he has to prove that the longer time on the market and the more popularity on earth indicate the effectiveness of CA.

总得来说，前两个攻击点不错，一个是说side effect 的程度没说清楚,一个是说 old != effective

其实这篇我也没有好的攻击点，但是不是可以从定义下手 effective 对于感冒药老说是指治疗感冒的效果，如果能很快并能治好很多种感冒，就能说他有效，与副作用无关，这是两个不同的概念