argument169 【1106G】gelivable小组 第5次作业

MrTomUID: 2904037

证据 A: Some studies conducted by Bronston College,which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female prefessors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geohraphic area.
结论 B: 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 spouses of each new faculty member we hire.
理由 C1：because if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers.
结论 C2: 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 wll spent
隐含条件D：professors care most about 他们的伴侣是否能在本地找到工作

A+D -> B
C1 -> C2

****************************************************************************************
In the letter, the chairperson suggested that the Pierce University should offer employment to the spouses of each new faculty member they hire and asserted the money invested will clearly be well spent. To support his conclusion, he mentioned results of some studies which indicates the professors are happier in Bronston College when the College offer the same policy. However, the suggestion is problematic and flawed in many aspects after careful examination and further consideration.


First, the advice that offering employment to the spouses of new faculty members is unpersuasive. Since there are no evidence support for the idea that most gifted teachers and researchers would be attracted by the policy, not to mention the rising the morale of entire staff. The studies indicate that those professors are happier, but no direct information could guarantee that the professors in Pierce University would be happier too. Since the two colleges are possible having totally different conditions such as research background, supporting fund, climate, etc. Even if they were happier about the policy, no poof could make it sure that the most gifted professors would come to accept this offer. The chairperson has a false assumption that what these professors care most about is whether their spouses would be employed at the same place. But common sense tells us that most of them pay much more attention on how much the school could help with their academic career and the chairperson doesn't give the academic advantage of the Pierce University. Thus, it is hasty to offer such a suggestion without clearly understanding of the difference between these colleges and the most attractive element to professors.


Moreover, the chairperson claims that the money invested would be well spent. Nevertheless, this advice is misleading. People decide whether investments are well used by how much are the benefits brought by the investments. In this case, the benefits come from the investment could not be guaranteed and are more likely to be turned into negative effect. Since those who with poor research background and has less pursuing in academic world would be more interested in this kind of policy. If Pierce University accepts many faculties who share the same characteristic, thus the morale of entire stuff would be negative affected and even influence the quality of research and education in this university.


Besides, the studies' validity is casted in doubt due to lack of precise data and detail. What is the percentage of professors involved in this study comparing to the total numbers? If the percentage is low, then the results of the studies' are unconvincing and meaningless. Are they really feel happier due to their spouses are employed? They are happier when their spouses are employed does not equal to that the reason why they feel happier is due to this policy. It is entirely possible professors' wages are raised in that area. Without clearing these doubts, the suggestion is groundless.


To sum up, the advice has many fatal fallacies as discussed above. To strengthen the suggestion, the chairperson , instead of counting on the policy to attractive gifted professors, he should pay more attention on the elements which professors really care about. In addition, he should be careful using the studies’ results and find other reliable policies making the investments worthy.

cjwang123UID: 2687082

今天刚好也写到这篇argu  楼主前面的逻辑链分析的很到位，

第一段分析的也很合理， 但第二段关于反驳不能提升士气的理由个人觉得有点牵强  我是写可能老教授会觉得不公平或他们认为这钱可花在买设备改善福利等等  至于第三段，貌似属于常规找茬  那还不如把一段两小点拆开来？

因此，我的思路是  先说可能两个城镇基本情况不一样，BC快乐可能是风景好 交通生活都便利
然后教授选择看中的因素 薪水啊 科研设备  教学条件啊
最后写即使都满足，也不一定提升士气.

以上纯属个人看法， 欢迎讨论交流意见！
1# MrTom

cymbillUID: 2881977

楼主的句子相当不错，但第一段略有点啰嗦