Argu No.196 高频 新鲜出炉 求大家过来看看评评

yvs5040UID：2869018

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: 496
TIME: 12:30:00 AM
DATE: 6/8/2011

The arguer claims that since a survey in Bronston College shows that professors are happier if their spouses are also employed in neighborhood, the same trick should works on Pierce University to attract new professors. This is a fallacy based on a incomparable case study with unsounded reasoning.

First of all, the arguer claims that university should provide offer to the spouse of each new faculty member. This would be a money wasting move which brings more troubles over benefits. In an university, besides professors and lecturers, cleaning persons, department assistants, maintenance works are all counted in the faculty list. It is certainly not all of them are worthy to double-pay in case they find another job and leave the university. If the university provide job offer to their spouse, the only thing we get will be an enormous salary bill. Moreover, most of the non-teaching faculties are comparably free during the work days. Bring the spouses to them will allure them to spend time with their spouses during the working hour and then diminish the morale and efficiency of the entire staff. Consequently, the university is paying money in return for the loafing on the job. Besides that, it also possible that the spouse of the professor accept the job but the professor himself/ herself does not plan to take our offer. If so, we are wasting money on those we do not need and miss the person we actually want to hire.

Secondly, what really bring good professor to the university is outstanding technical labs, brilliant academic co-works and faculty group, relaxing campus atmosphere and rewarding pay check instead of offering a random job offer to their spouses. With certain amount of money, we should develop the machines in the labs; provide more tempting rewarding and enough acedemic funding to satisfy the needs of promising professors. Some of the new professors might not even have spouses or their spouse are not working relevant to the university and do not want to work in the university at all.

Thirdly, Bronston College is certainly not exactly same with Pierce University. Bronston College might have less faculty and more financial funds than Pierce University do. Also, some studies reveal current professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. This can not provide any information about how prospective professor feels. Furthermore, the arguer understatedly mentioned that there exist some studies showing that phenomenon. The arguer neither provides how many such studies had been done nor presents how well such studies had been confirmed and sealed. There might be studies claiming prospective professors are happier if their spouses are not work in the same area. The conclusion based on a false analogy with insufficient evident is unjustified and unconvincing.

In sum, the reasoning of the author lacks sufficient evidences, sounded reasoning and well-founded analogy as discussed above. More rounded experiments and solid consideration are needed to reach the conclusion.






PS: argu写多少字合理又不错? 我从来没超过500过= =~~ 400多够用不?