9月26日的Argument，请有空的朋友互改:)

patrickgmail · 发表于 2012-9-26 19:21:24

50.
Anancient, traditional remedy for insomnia—the scent of lavender flowers—has nowbeen proved effective. In a recent study, 30 volunteers with chronic insomniaslept each night for three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlledroom where their sleep was monitored electronically. During the first week,volunteers continued to take their usual sleeping medication. They sleptsoundly but wakened feeling tired. At the beginning of the second week, thevolunteers discontinued their sleeping medication. During that week, they sleptless soundly than the previous week and felt even more tired. During the thirdweek, the volunteers slept longer and more soundly than in the previous twoweeks. Therefore, the study proves that lavender cures insomniawithin a short period of time.

Write a response in which you discuss whatspecific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how theevidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

patrickgmail · 发表于 2012-9-26 19:22:11

[467 words]

The argument, with a recent study of 30 volunteers in three weeks-observation, tries to prove that the lavender cures insomnia in a short period time while using the lavender-scented pillows on subjects. The arguer, however, fails to give logical convincing evidence with certain crucial assumptions.

At first, the arguer assumes that the recent study including only 30 people can be an effective back for the argument. The study, yet, with the sample assumption, is without much more representative among quantity of subjects and authority of the study itself. For counterexample, if there are many other more than 1000+ people specialized surveys, which suggest that the lavender-scent pillow even the scent of lavender flowers are ineffective to cure insomnia, the argument will be weakened. To strengthen the argument, the arguer can show much on how typical the subjects or other study with the similar result as the paragraph mentioned. Therefore, with only one study, the argument, in fact, is not convincing.

Futhermore, the argument implies that the lavender-scented pillow is responsible for cure insomnia. However, as the paragraph mentions, the traditional remedy for insomnia is the scent of lavender flowers but not lavender-scented pillows. What one can see, the lavender-scented pillows is reasonable shared the same word “lavender-scented”. But the arguer does not show any evidence that the lavender-scented pillows equals to traditional natural scent of lavender flowers. For instance, the sufferers are only sleep well with the natural scent of lavender but not other chemical lavender-scent from pillow. Supposing that the scent of lavender can be as the scent of the lavender-scent pillows, it can be presumptively to say that there no other decisive factors like the medication the argument refers interference the result of the study. The causal assumptions that the arguer omits make the argument inconvincible.

Finally, even the lavender-scent pillow works as paragraph mentioned. Nonetheless, the study, which shows effective result of the lavender-scent pillow, is merely within three weeks. However, the author does not show the subjects’ situation after three weeks, with a gratuitous conclusion that lavender cures insomnia within a short period of time. Much worse, the arguer does not define what a short period of time is and assumes being effective in the study is equal to cure in insomnia in a short period of time. Thus, the argument lack of evidence in fact is weakened, though those subjects in the survey slept longer.
In conclusion, by barely concluding that lavender-scent pillow can cure the insomnia in a short period of time, the arguer fails to substantiate its claim by a study which is with many logical flaws. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence with regard to given certain details in study, to do so, it would have more thorough and logical acceptable.

普渡哥 · 发表于 2012-9-27 11:25:42

the arguer assumes that the recent study including only 30 people can be an effective back for the argument.

这里的back什么意思？

patrickgmail · 发表于 2012-9-27 11:31:25

the arguer assumes that the recent study including only 30 people can be an effective back for the argument.

这里的back什么意思？

-- by 会员普渡哥 (2012/9/27 11:25:42)

不能这样用了。
我本来是学OG的说法：it can not be used to effectively back the author's argument.
谢谢批改。

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-9-27 11:40:54

the arguer assumes that the recent study including only 30 people can be an effective back for the argument.

这里的back什么意思？

-- by 会员普渡哥 (2012/9/27 11:25:42)

不能这样用了。
我本来是学OG的说法：it can not be used to effectively back the author's argument.
谢谢批改。

-- by 会员 patrickgmail (2012/9/27 11:31:25)

在这里是支持的意思

[作文互改] 9月26日的Argument，请有空的朋友互改:)

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块