Argument203 永不言弃第二十三次作业 by stgzhao 7#

stgzhaoUID: 2583165

TOPIC: ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
WORDS: 487          TIME: 00:22:14          DATE: 2009-3-2 22:37:15

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. The notion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals seems at first glance to be an obvious conclusion, which based mainly on a series of data including average stay time of patients, cure rate among patients, employee-patient ratio, and the amount of complaints about service. Close exam of these supporting evidences, however, reveals the author's claim is little credible.
The most important, also the most fatal flaw of the argument is that it commits a logical fallacy that the situations in small, nonprofit hospital and in larger, for-profit hospital are obviously not similar - when people go to small hospitals it is more likely that they only have aliment that is not severe while when they move into larger ones it often indicates that something really bad had happened. Based on this mistake the argument commits a series of unfairly assumptions.
To begin with, the average stay time in hospital leads no strong support to the conclusion that small hospitals is more economical and of better quality. The argument fails to provide any evidence showing that patient’s stay in small hospital is shorter than in larger one is because of the better quality of the small hospital. Perhaps the illness is not so serious that could make the patients remain in hospital for a long time. And, since small hospitals are often local hospitals, it is possible that patients tend to move back their home for better recovery just because the service in small hospitals are of low quality. If so, the average stay time data could not serve as a strong support to the conclusion.
Moreover, the cure rate among patients cannot support the conclusion well either. It is entirely possible that the fact that the cure rate of small hospital is higher than that of larger one is due to the situation that people tend to go to larger hospitals for treatment of disease which is more serious. In addition, maybe it is the fact that larger hospitals are of better quality that makes people tend to go there for medical treatment, and thus cause the circumstance that the Saluda hospital (typical small and nonprofit hospital) has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville (represent of larger and for-profit hospitals). Since patients are more likely to go to larger hospitals for treatment when they get some serious illness, there is no doubt that they complaint more there. After all, patients often tend to be of bad moods when they feel pain.
In sum, the conclusion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the claim the argument must provide concrete situation of both of the two kind of hospital.

MYcoltingUID: 2563080

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.这句话自己加工下吧 用的人太多了 The notion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospital is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals seems at first glance to be an obvious conclusion, which based mainly on a series of data including average stay time of patients, cure rate among patients, employee-patient ratio, and the amount of complaints about service. Close exam of these supporting evidences, however, reveals the author's claim is little credible.

The most important, also the most fatal flaw of the argument is that it commits a logical fallacy that the situations in small, nonprofit hospital and in larger, for-profit hospital are obviously not similar - when people go to small hospitals it is more likely that they only have aliment that is not severe while when they move into larger ones it often indicates that something really bad had happened. Based on this mistake the argument commits a series of unfairly assumptions.

To begin with, the average stay time in hospital leads no strong support to the conclusion that small hospitals is more economical and of better quality. The argument fails to provide any evidence showing that patients' stay in small hospital is shorter than in larger one is because of the better quality of the small hospital. Perhaps the illness is not so serious that could make the patients remain in hospital for a long time.写反了 And, since small hospitals are often local hospitals, it is possible that patients tend to move back their home for better recovery just because the service in small hospitals are of low quality. If so, the average stay time data could not serve as a strong support to the conclusion.

Moreover, the cure rate among patients cannot support the conclusion well either. It is entirely possible that the fact that the cure rate of small hospital is higher than that of larger one is due to the situation that people tend to go to larger hospitals for treatment of disease which is more serious. In addition, maybe it is the fact that larger hospitals are of better quality that makes people tend to go there for medical treatment, and thus cause the circumstance that the Saluda hospital (typical small and nonprofit hospital) has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville (represent of larger and for-profit hospitals). Since patients are more likely to go to larger hospitals for treatment when they get some serious illness, there is no doubt that they complaint more there. After all, patients often tend to be of bad moods when they feel pain.恩 这句话提醒我 病人的抱怨也是个攻击点 他们究竟抱怨什么

In sum, the conclusion that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the claim the argument must provide concrete situation of both of the two kind of hospital.