【Flyer杀G作文组】7.23-Argument169-By CC

师大菜菜UID: 2838404

TOPIC: ARGUMENT169 - The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University.

"Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers."
WORDS: 406
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/7/22 17:07:13

In the argument, the speaker asserts that the Pierce University (PU) should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member hired by the Univerisity. To support the suggestion, the author represents the results of some studies conducted by Bronston College (BC). Although the argument might be reasoning at first glance, it has some logical fallacies which make it unpersuasive.

To begin with, the speaker represents the studies conducted by BC, but he or she fails to prove the results of those studies are convincing. It is possible that the studies just survey a few of people which cannot represent the general idea of professors. For example, the studies just survey the professors who have no cars and these kinds of professor like their spouses living in same town. However, the professors who have car are not very interested in living together because they can conveniently meet by car. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author cannot convince me that the studies are persuasive.

What's more, even if the results of studies are true, it cannot lend any support to the conclusion due to these professors are happier are not necessarily because they live in the same town with their spouses. It is possible that comparing with the professors who have not been married, the married professors are happier which has not relationship with whether live together with their spouses. The author fails to take account to other possible explanation on the results of studies, his or her conclusion is not convincing.

Last but not least, even if the professors
are happier actually due to live together with their spouses, the author still cannot draw his conclusion, because he or she ignore the possible differences between BC and PC. It is possible that BC's professors depend on their spouses, while PC’s are not. It is also possible that PC's professors are all benchers who have no spouse, therefore the new policies are meaningless to the professors in PC. In these cases, the author cannot make sure that the policies in PC will also be effective. In short, the argument is flawed unless the author accounting to the differences between PC and BC.

To sum up, the author don't provide evidence to support the speaker fail to prove that the professors are happier due to they living together with their spouses. It is also necessary to make sure that PC and BC are similar.