Argument169 考前10天第一次模考，求建议 by ieyangj08

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

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."

我的思路
1 BC如此， PU未必如此。
2假设配偶没能力找到工作。其配偶完全有能力在企业或政府找到更好的工作。
3 未必能提高整体士气。老员工的士气可能会被打击。

In this argument, the author draws the conclusion that Pierce University should offer job opportunities to the spouse of each new teachers or researchers they hire, and money spend on this is well invested. Admittedly, it appears to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that this argument suffers from several logical flaws.

To begin with, the author’s conclusion is based on the assumption that the study result of professors in Bronston College (BC) will also be applied to professors in Pierce University (PU). Only based on the fact that both universities are located in small town, we could not get the study results of the two universities are also same, for there might be other differences of the two towns. For example, BC is located in a remote small town whose transportation system is underdeveloped. If professors’ spouses work in a place away from the town, the couples will meet each other difficultly and thus feel unhappy. However, PU might locate in a town with sound transportation system, and couples can easily meet each other even they work in separate places. If this is true, the arguer’s conclusion is suspicious.

Anther assumption that weakens the logic of this argument is that spouses of PU’s new members can’t find jobs by themselves. Nevertheless, in common sense we know that most spouses of professors will not have low capacities. Perhaps, they can find better jobs with higher payment and more opportunities for promotion in the town where PU located. Or perhaps, they already have such jobs in nearby area. Without compelling evidences to support this assumption, the author’s assertion is dubious.

Finally, the author’s viewpoint that money invested on this effort will improve morale of PU’s entire staff is open to doubt. In the argument, this plan will only give job opportunities to new staff’s spouses, so older employees’ enthusiasm for work might be reduced. It is completely probable that these employments are well paid. But older employees can’t get these jobs for their spouses. Then they will feel imbalance, thus reduce their morale. Unless give more evidence to support his/her viewpoint, it is hard to believe morale of entire staff will be improved.

All in all, this argument relies on certain unwarranted assumptions and therefore specious at best. To convince readers to accept his/her conclusion, the author should provide more information on both towns BC and PU located, capacities of PU staff’s spouses, and older employees’ attitude toward this proposal.

wcnkUID: 2546550

因为昨天刚刚写过这篇，随意谈谈我的意见：
1.首先，楼主文章很标准，结构明确，可见比较熟练，而且相信也有自己的模板了，这些都非常好，而且还有个优点：就是错别字很少，我一直发愁word里花花绿绿的怎么办呢~~
2.提提意见：有的句子很chinglish
“Then they will feel imbalance, thus reduce their morale”只拿这句举个例子，直译过来的~~呵呵
另外，有的地方（比如还是这段的论点）和反驳说的并不是一个问题（也许是我没理解透~~）先说花钱不一定值得，后说老雇员可能不平衡，个人感觉，不如直接说“the claim that it can improves the morale of our entire staff is unconvincing”。
还有一点，我认为楼主逻辑攻击可以再提高，不要上来就外推错误（B的方法CP不适用~~）

我的意见：可以最后拿些高频题或者写过的题目仔细想想逻辑关系，可以找点更有力的攻击点~~
当然这只是个人意见，毕竟我也还没考，正在努力~~