argument162我的第一篇argument，请大家指教~
In the report, the author committee concludes that North Americans should eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression. In order to support the conclusion, the author claims that people living on the continent of North America suffer these problems more than people in Asians do, that Asians eat soy regularly whereas North Americans do not, and it is known that soy would possess disease-preventing properties. However, I find the argument specious in several factors.
First, the argument assumes that the difference in soy consumption is the only possible explanation for this disparity in the occurrence of fatigue and depression. Yet the argument fails to substantiate this assumption. Common sense informs me that any one of a myriad of other differences-environmental, dietary, and genetic-might explain why North Americans suffer from these problems to a greater extent than Asian do. Without considering and ruling our alternative reasons for this disparity, the argument's conclusion that soy is the key to the disparity is indefensible.
Secondly, the arguer unfairly assumes that the fact, Asians eat soy per day and suffer far less from these problems, would ensure the similar result in North Americans. There is not enough evidence that Asia an North Americans living in the same conditions. Even though soy is well possess disease-preventing properties, without accounting for possible difference between Asians and North Americans, the arguer cannot convince me that North Americans should eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression.
Finally, the argument unfairly infers from the fact that soy is known to possess disease-preventing properties. It is questionable that whether fatigue and depression are belongs to disease. Although we classify them as disease, the absence of evidence concerning phytochemicals called isflavones that contained in soy could not prove that these properties help prevent fatigue and depression. Only if the study could provide more accurate evidence, it would not serve to validate that assumption.
To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis dose not lends strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence the people in Asia in fact suffer less from fatigue and depression. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding whether eating soy would has the same result in North Americans. I would also need to know the fact that soy would possess fatigue and depression.
