- UID
- 676046
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2011-9-26
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
Argument 2 . The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal.
"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring."
In this argument, the arguer advocates that the birth order can have an influence on an individual’s levels of stimulation. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived. The reasons are stated as follows.
In the first place, the arguer assumes that the infant monkey who is the firstborn will produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol when they encounter with some stimulations in order to become more flexible like their siblings. Although this is entirely correct, the arguer offers no more evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption and lack of the comparison between the two different monkeys. It is possible that someone else make the other study of monkeys that are not born in the first to find they would have the same or more dramatically reaction to the unusual stimulations as well as the firstborn ones. Then the conclusion that the order of babies can affect the cortisol can not be bolstered by the study.
In the second place, the arguer uses an observation of human firstborn infants also have relatively high level of hormones in stimulation conditions as an example to support the above assumption. But the arguer fails to establish the relationship between the human and monkeys that they can be comparable in the aspect of hormones level when they meet the same situation. Human beings and monkeys are two different kinds of animals, the big differences between them might lead to the variety functions of the cortisol. Human beings can reflect the stimulus through other ways like the amplification the pupils, other styles hormones in body increase or the movement of eyes rather than the high level of the cortisol. Without accounting for and ruling out these and other alternative explanations, the arguer cannot convince people to believe the recommendation.
The last but not the least important, even if the evidence turns out to support the foregoing assumptions that the hormone secreted by the firstborn infant monkeys is higher than their brothers and sisters after them in face with the stimulation, the arguer just hastily assume that the hormone level in first-time mother monkeys during pregnancy had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring. It is reasonable to doubt that what the arguer assumes will not to be the truth. To reach the cited conclusion, the arguer must explain that the high level of hormone of woman who is first to pregnant have the causality relation to that of their firstborn children.
To sum up, the arguer’s argument mentioned above is not the based on valid evidenced or sound reasoning, neither of which is dispensable for a conclusive argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should reason more convincingly to make some comparison study to analysis all the body change to the stimulus, cite some evidence that is more persuasive to make people agree with the similarity between human and monkey, and take every possible consideration into account to obviate other possible explanations for the result of the study.
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-10-20 22:32:34
收藏
收藏
楼主
