Argument59【 超越自我小组】第十二次作业by cartographer08

cartographer08UID: 2523568

The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.

According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity-that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun.

In the article appeared in the health section of a newspaper, the arguer claims that people at particular risk for flu should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. To support this conclusion, the arguer cited medical records of six years during the past 300 years. However, through careful examination, we can find that the conclusion is based on a series of fallacies.

In the first place, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the worldwide flu epidemic and the heavy sunspot activity. The mere fact that six worst worldwide flu epidemics occurred in the years with heavy sunspot activity does not necessarily guarantee the conclusion that the epidemic is caused by the extra solar energy received. Common sense tells us that there are many factors affect the spring of flu, such as bad weather, contaminated water or animal like rats. Perhaps in these years, these factor mentioned account for the broke of the contagious disease. So the auger fail to take other factors that might have influence on the worldwide flu epidemics.

What’s more, compare to the thousands years of human history, the 300 years doesn’t represent the whole, therefore the six medical records couldn’t stand for all. Maybe in the other years, the medical records are not the same as described in this newspaper. It’s highly possible that in other 3000 years or longer, when the Earth received more solar energy, there were no worldwide flu epidemics at all. So the assumption that it is the heavy sunspot activity caused the flu should be dropped and the further conclusion based on this assumption is false.

Finally, the argument commits a fallacy of hasty conclusion that people at particular risk for the flu should prevent prolonged exposure to the Sun. Even if the high amount of solar energy will increase the possibility of flu epidemics, which is of course not guarantee as mentioned above, we could not surely conclude that decrease the time exposure to Sun would prevent it. Maybe these people at particular risk for flu have other reasons that the arguer ignores. Perhaps they are born with genetic indecency, which making them easy to catch cold. Or they have irregular habits so that they are week to any kind of flu. In all these situations, even these people took the suggestion and not exposure to the Sun, they still might get infectious.

To sum up, the argument is not persuasive, at least as it stands here.

[ 本帖最后由 cartographer08 于 2008-8-16 01:25 编辑 ]