【Flyer杀G作文组】7月22日Argument169-By 但我

但我UID: 2763822

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: 154
TIME: 00:30:00


DATE: 2010/7/24 10:31:27

The arguer asserts that in order to make their university appeal to talented teachers and researchers and improve the morale of their entire staff, they should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member they hire. The author infers that if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept the university's offers. Though not all positions be accepted or treated as ideal choice, the money would be well spent on this matter. I disagree with the author for three reasons: (1) there is no evidence that spouses living together would be happier than living separately. (2) The two towns cannot be compared straight. (3)When it comes to the improvement of morale, happy marriage may not guarantee a higher morale, which is composed of other factors. Will it cost a lot to offer employment to faculty's spouses? If the financial circumstances are not adequate, then they should think twice before making decisions.
First of all, the author's evidence are insufficient to support the conclusion. Obviously, author does not provide enough information on the subjects of the survey. But we are told nothing whether the couples are happier when they live together than live separately. Maybe they would be more delightful when they live in two different regions.
Secondly, the author makes an oversimplified analogy between Bronston College and Pierce University. In most instances, this is an unwarranted assumption for the simple reason that things rarely remain the same from place to place. As we know, many factors should be taken into the consideration, such as demographics of population, geographical and physical terrain of the two different towns. Maybe the town where Bronston College settled has a higher repute, thus people are more likely to love living there.
Furthermore the arguer ignores the possibility that the school spirit, work, and salary other than marriage may also have effect on the morale of universities. No evidence has shown that the working places of spouses are the only or important criterion of choosing jobs for professors. Unless the arguer also takes these factors into account, the comparison is unconvincing. Moreover, if the university is bearing a financial strain, or this expense costs a large sum of money, the welfare shouldn't be applied to every new faculty.

As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer must provide evidence to rule out other possible causes of the happiness of staff, and seek effective ways to improve the morale of the university.