140.The following appeared in a report of the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University.
"During her seventeen years as a professor of botany, Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Her classes are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students. Moreover, the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. Therefore, in consideration of Professor Thomas' demonstrated teaching and research abilities, we recommend that she receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; without such a raise and promotion, we fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college."
In this argument, the author recommends that they should give Professor Thomas a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson, and they fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college without such a raise and promotion. The recommendation is based on the fact that her class is among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students, and the author also points that the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. The argument suffers from three critical fallacies.
First, by relying on the fact that her classes are among the largest at the university, to support its conclusion the argument depends on the assumption that the large number of students on her class means her popularity among students. However, maybe the big class has no relationship with popularity. It is possible that her class is about the base course, and students should all take part in it. Or perhaps students are all called to attend her class, or their final score will be very low. So though some student reluctant to be in the class, they have to. Without eliminating this possibility, the author cannot rely on the big class to conclude that her class is popular.
Secondly, even though the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years, the author unfairly assumes that the increase will also appear in the future. However, the author fails to provide any evidence to support the assumption. Perhaps there are other factors for the reason. Maybe she got the money by a lucky chance and she will never have the luck, bring nothing to the research grants. Or perhaps the money is just a little more than $50,000. Since the arguer has failed to consider and rule out these possibilities, the arguer's assertion that she should receive a $10,000 raise can not be taken seriously.
Thirdly, even if Professor Thomas is really a excellent faculty, and can bring a lot of money to the university, the arguer cannot assume further that she should be promoted to Department Chairperson. The ability of teaching and bringing money means nothing about the ability of being the Department Chairperson. As a chairperson, she has to deal with a lot of trifles, we are worried about that we will lose a good faculty and add to a unable chairperson. And it is possible that there are many other faculties who are in the same condition or even super to her. Without comparison with others and make the hasty decision may raise their dissatisfaction, and cause big influence.
Finally, the author make a assumption that Professor Thomas will go to another college if we do not give a raise and promote her to Department Chairperson without and evidence. Maybe she is well satisfied with her salary, and do not want to be chairperson. Perhaps what she really like is the circumstance of this university and only through teaching student can she get the biggest happiness. So we can improve her research equipments and the circumstance around her to praise her excellence.
In conclusion, the author's argument lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strength it, the author must provide more convincing evidence that Professor Thomas is indeed popular among students. To better evaluate the argument we would need more information about whether she can bring in large amount of money in the future. We would also need to know she has the ability to be a Department Chairperson and without the raising money and promotion she is sure to leave our university.作者: cdjcc 时间: 2007-8-13 18:02:42
拜读完,谈谈拙见....
我只找缺点:loveliness:
1 段落中用了很多的~WE~的大众语气....感觉可能要被扣分
2 Or perhaps the money is just a little more than $50,000,感觉这个的解释有点牵强
3 少许语句上的错误
总体来说还是不错的了:loveliness:作者: binghe3000 时间: 2007-8-14 10:58:45 标题: 回复 #2 cdjcc 的帖子