The author concludes here that the scent of lavender flower cures insomnia within a short period of time. stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. In support of this conclusion, the author reasons that the team of thirty volunteers had slept on lavender-scented pillows in the night for three weeks in a row and thus their insomnia had been cured. however, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it provides little credible support for the author's conclusion.
first of all, the argument readily assumes that the insomnia of the volunteers has cured because they slept on the lavender-scented pillows. this is merely an assumption made without much solid ground. For example, what if the medication that they took earlier in those weeks has cured the insomnia or the room was more sleep inducing. Hence the argument would have been much more convincing if it explicitly stated that [].
The argument also readily claims that during the first week the volunteers slept soundly but wakened feeling tired because they are on medication. this again is a weak and unsupportive claim since it does not demonstrate that the scent of the lavender flowers caused this. To illustrate further [].
Finally, the author points out that during the second week they did not sleep well and was very tired because they stopped taking the medication. but it does not provide any information that whether or not the lavender flower caused this issue. however, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it provides little credible support for the author's conclusion in several critical aspects and raises skeptical questions. For example, why they been so tired and slept less in the second week despite of sleeping on the lavender flower pillow? why they slept soundly in the first week even being on the medication? why the author put the volunteers in medication in first place? without convincing answers to these questions the reader is left in the impression that the claim made by the author are more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the author's argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the author must provide much more concrete evidence, perhaps by a detailed analysis of the medication and the scent of the lavender flower.
The
author
concludes here that the scent of
lavender
flower
cures
insomnia
within a short period of time.
stated
in this way, the
argument
fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could
be evaluated
. In support of this conclusion, the
author
reasons that the team of thirty
volunteers
had
slept
on lavender-scented pillows in the night for three
weeks
in a row and
thus
their
insomnia
had
been cured
.
however
, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it
provides
little
credible support for the author's conclusion.
first of all
, the
argument
readily
assumes that the
insomnia
of the
volunteers
has cured
because
they
slept
on the lavender-scented pillows.
this
is
merely
an assumption made without much solid ground.
For example
, what if the
medication
that they took earlier in those
weeks
has cured the
insomnia
or the room was more sleep inducing.
Hence
the
argument
would have been much more convincing if it
explicitly
stated that [].
The
argument
also
readily
claims that during the
first
week
the
volunteers
slept
soundly
but
wakened feeling tired
because
they are on
medication
.
this
again is a weak and
unsupportive
claim since it does not demonstrate that the scent of the
lavender
flowers
caused this. To illustrate
further
[].
Finally
, the
author
points out that during the second
week
they did not sleep well and was
very
tired
because
they
stopped
taking the
medication
.
but
it does not
provide
any information that
whether or not
the
lavender
flower
caused this issue.
however
, careful scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it
provides
little
credible support for the author's conclusion in several critical aspects and raises skeptical questions.
For example
, why they
been
so
tired and
slept
less in the second
week
despite of
sleeping on the
lavender
flower
pillow?
why
they
slept
soundly
in the
first
week
even being on the
medication
?
why
the
author
put the
volunteers
in
medication
in
first
place?
without
convincing answers to these questions the reader is
left
in the impression that the claim made by the
author
are more of a wishful thinking
rather
than substantive evidence.
In conclusion
, the author's
argument
is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the
author
must
provide
much more concrete evidence, perhaps by a detailed analysis of the
medication
and the scent of the
lavender
flower
.