也许有人说arguement有什么难写的，不就是找逻辑错误么？那么多错误，随便找3个就ok了，简单的很。但是，我得告诉大家，arguement不单单是要你找逻辑错误，内在的要求是你自己的文章也要很具有逻辑性。

       什么叫很具有逻辑性？那就是你文章的组织、你段与段之间的关系，不能拉出来什么就是什么；什么逻辑问题能说的多就先说什么；什么逻辑来不及说或者说不清楚，就草草结束。逻辑错误应该是从大到小排列，而不是简单的先到先排。

       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."

       先看我同学是怎么写的。他的3段攻击大概是这样的：

       1. 2个医生背景不同；

       2. 2个实验组的具体情况信息实在太少，不足以判断；

       3. 并不一定所有的病人都会发生2次感染。

       想来他的思路具有一些普遍性。现在来看我说。

       要写好arguement，首先就是要学会读题目。

       怎么读题目？不是单单找逻辑错误就完了的。你更要分析题目句子和句子间的逻辑关系。也许有的人此刻会笑，心说，“哪个模版上不说，‘arguer所说的结论是什么，他的论据是什么……’，有谁会分不清楚？” 虽然谁都知道，但是你有没有真正想过这里面的内在含义？

       这个题目，我会分成3块。

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

       第二是结论：Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment.

       剩下来的都是论据。

       但是请分清楚这些都是谁的论据，他们都是用来证明“This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients”的。换言之，就是前提的论据。

       简单说来，就是作者的话可以这样复述：“因为【前提】的存在，所以我的【结论】是……。那为什么说这个【前提】是正确的呢？因为【论据】。”

       那现在我们来分析，这3者间的逻辑关系。前提和结论，可以说是一个因果关系（至少作者想体现出一种因果关系）；论据和前提，也可以说是一个因果关系，因为这里的论据是用来证明前提的。

       但是，究竟哪个逻辑关系是主关系呢？显然应该是前提和结论的因果关系。如果你承认这点，那么就应该在你的第一攻击点，首先考虑攻击这个关系。反过来说，如果你第一段攻击了那2组病人的实验，那你就是主次没分清楚。