【Big Fish】 Argument169 by Greeky

greekyUID: 2605662

169.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."

Grounding on a result of a recent survey related to professor couples in the near Bronston College(BC) that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area ,the arguer concludes that Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member they hire. However,this conclusion suffers from some logical flaws.

First of all,the arguer neglects to provide detailed information regarding the accurate number of the samples and the procedure of the survey. The vague number of the samples in itself does not suffice to lend strong support to the arguer`s conclusion. If the samples only includes couples at similar ages,such as 30 or 60,the result will no doubt indicate that it only supply to the similar people. Of if the number of the samples only account for a small percent of the whole professors of BC,the result will be meaningless.

Moreover, the arguer`s recommendation falsely relies on a analogy between BC and PU. However,commonsense inform me that the analogy might be a poor one. Is is entirely possible that  PU is totally different from the BC even they are both located in a small town. The arguer fails to rule out many possible explanation,for instance,it may be the economics of the two town are different that attribute to a completely different result of a similar survey in the PU. Or perhaps the average age of professors of BC is much elder than that of PU,which may result in the fact that the elders in BC want to live together with their spouses. Without ruling out possibilities such as these,the arguer cannot asserts that recommendation.

Finally,it is possible to offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member. Firstly,maybe there are unsufficient jobs which can be offered to these people. Even though PU really offer such a large number of job to the people,the cost associated with the event will be tremendous. Secondly,it is unnecessary to offer everyone--just offer the people`s spouses who we have to keep. And thirdly,from my personal perspective,issues such as updating the facilities or improving the education system play a more significant role in attracting the experts. Without accounting for the possible solutions,the arguer`s recommendation is unacceptable.

In sum,if the arguer had  included the factors discussed above,the argument would have been more logically convincing.

BobbieZZUID: 2756583

1# greeky
"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. (对于原题的的摘抄复述过多了) 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."

Grounding on a result of a recent survey related to professor couples in the near Bronston College(BC) that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area ,the arguer concludes that Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member they hire. However,this conclusion suffers from some logical flaws.
（两段开头。。。是不是太多了呀）


First of all,the arguer neglects to provide detailed information regarding the accurate number of the samples and the procedure of the survey. The vague number of the samples in itself does not suffice to lend strong support to the arguer’s conclusion. If the samples only includes couples at similar ages,such as 30 or 60,the result will no doubt indicate that it only supply to the similar people. Of if the number of the samples only account for a small percent of the whole professors of BC（AW里可以进行这样的简写？）,the result will be meaningless.
(我觉得这个谬误不是很好)

Moreover, the arguer`s recommendation falsely relies on a analogy between BC and PU. However,commonsense inform me that the analogy might be a poor one. Is（It）
is entirely possible that  PU is totally different from the BC even they are both located in a small town. The arguer fails to rule out many possible explanation,for instance,it may be the economics of the two town are different that attribute to a completely different result of a similar survey in the PU. Or perhaps the average age of professors of BC is much elder than that of PU,which may result in the fact that the elders in BC want to live together with their spouses. Without ruling out possibilities such as these,the arguer cannot asserts that recommendation.



Finally,it is possible to offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member（你是支持题目观点？）. Firstly,maybe there are unsufficient jobs which can be offered to these people. Even though PU really offer such a large number of job to the people,the cost associated with the event will be tremendous. Secondly,it is unnecessary to offer everyone--just offer the people`s spouses who we have to keep. And thirdly,from my personal perspective,issues such as updating the facilities or improving the education system play a more significant role in attracting the experts. Without accounting for the possible solutions,the arguer`s recommendation is unacceptable.

In sum,if the arguer had  included the factors discussed above,the argument would have been more logically convincing.

语言还可以，可是逻辑有点不太紧密，而且谬误好像不太好。第三层好像开始在支持题目的观点，不太好吧。

这个几个谬误你可以参考一下
1.The fact that professors are happier living in small towns might be due to other factors, but not because they are living together with their spouses.
2.The chairperson fails to consider the possible differences between Bronston College and Pierce University, thus merely copying Bronston’s activity may not be same effective at Pierce.
3.The chairperson fails to point out what fraction of our faculty will be new members, thus the assumption that the morale of entire staff could be improved is open to doubt.
4.The chairperson fails to consider many other relevant factors that may influence new professors’ decision.
5.Even if the proposed actions are effective in attracting new professors, we cannot guarantee that the action will attract the most gifted teachers and researchers, and necessarily improving the morale of stuff.
6.The chairperson does not analyze the cost of the proposed actions, hence we cannot evaluate if the new professors attracted by the action are worthy of the investment.
7.The chairperson fails to consider if the university has the capability of offering employment to the spouse of every new faculty member.
8.The chairperson fails to illustrate that new gifted professors will not accept our offers if we do not offer such employment.
9.The chairperson overlooks other better ways to achieve the same result.