也許有人說arguement有什么難寫的，不就是找邏輯錯誤么？那么多錯誤，隨便找3個就ok了，簡單的很。但是，我得告訴大家，arguement不單單是要你找邏輯錯誤，內(nèi)在的要求是你自己的文章也要很具有邏輯性。

       什么叫很具有邏輯性？那就是你文章的組織、你段與段之間的關(guān)系，不能拉出來什么就是什么；什么邏輯問題能說的多就先說什么；什么邏輯來不及說或者說不清楚，就草草結(jié)束。邏輯錯誤應(yīng)該是從大到小排列，而不是簡單的先到先排。

       Arguement 51: The following appeared in a medical newsletter.

       "Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."

       先看我同學(xué)是怎么寫的。他的3段攻擊大概是這樣的：

       1. 2個醫(yī)生背景不同；

       2. 2個實驗組的具體情況信息實在太少，不足以判斷；

       3. 并不一定所有的病人都會發(fā)生2次感染。

       想來他的思路具有一些普遍性。現(xiàn)在來看我說。

       要寫好arguement，首先就是要學(xué)會讀題目。

       怎么讀題目？不是單單找邏輯錯誤就完了的。你更要分析題目句子和句子間的邏輯關(guān)系。也許有的人此刻會笑，心說，“哪個模版上不說，‘a(chǎn)rguer所說的結(jié)論是什么，他的論據(jù)是什么……’，有誰會分不清楚？” 雖然誰都知道，但是你有沒有真正想過這里面的內(nèi)在含義？

       這個題目，我會分成3塊。

       第一是前提：Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain.

       第二是結(jié)論：Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.

       剩下來的都是論據(jù)。

       但是請分清楚這些都是誰的論據(jù)，他們都是用來證明“This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients”的。換言之，就是前提的論據(jù)。

       簡單說來，就是作者的話可以這樣復(fù)述：“因為【前提】的存在，所以我的【結(jié)論】是……。那為什么說這個【前提】是正確的呢？因為【論據(jù)】。”

       那現(xiàn)在我們來分析，這3者間的邏輯關(guān)系。前提和結(jié)論，可以說是一個因果關(guān)系（至少作者想體現(xiàn)出一種因果關(guān)系）；論據(jù)和前提，也可以說是一個因果關(guān)系，因為這里的論據(jù)是用來證明前提的。

       但是，究竟哪個邏輯關(guān)系是主關(guān)系呢？顯然應(yīng)該是前提和結(jié)論的因果關(guān)系。如果你承認(rèn)這點(diǎn)，那么就應(yīng)該在你的第一攻擊點(diǎn)，首先考慮攻擊這個關(guān)系。反過來說，如果你第一段攻擊了那2組病人的實驗，那你就是主次沒分清楚。