Argument140 [Victors小组]第四次作业， 有一些问题，麻烦大家来看看

solartorchUID: 2244205

140 The following appeared in a report of the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University.

"During her seventeen years as a professor of botany, Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Her classes are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students. Moreover, the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. Therefore, in consideration of Professor Thomas' demonstrated teaching and research abilities, we recommend that she receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; without such a raise and promotion, we fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college."

字数626， 未限时
The author recommends Professor Thomas receive a raise and a promotion based on two premises. One is that Professor Thomas is well worth her current annual salary, the other is she will probably leave Elm City University without these measures. However, correlations are lacking on the jump from the premises to the conclusion. In addition, the writer fails to present cogent reasoning for the establishment of premises.
                                       
Firstly, the author unwarranted assumes that as a professor of botany who is worth her current salary, Professor Thomas deserves a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson. The author provides no consideration about the average salary of Professor Thomas’s colleagues. Perhaps $50,000 has already been the highest salary among all the professors and has no precedent. In that case, the raise of salary would lead to discontent and should be seriously questioned. Additionally, the writer fails to take into account possible differences between academic competence and social ability. An eminent professor of botany may not able to success as a Department Chairperson. Hence, the recommendation on promotion is also in lack of solid ground.

Secondly, the evidences provided in the argument do not necessarily indicate that Professor Thomas is worth her current salary. Having some of the largest classes at the university may not due to her popularity among students. It is quite possible that the university’s curriculum and timetable lead to her large classes. Furthermore, the fact that in each of the last two years the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary can’t assure that in the future she can still efficiently secure the grant. Besides, her colleagues who receive the less salary might have brought more grant then her. Without ruling out these possible scenarios, the author cannot convince me that Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000

Finally, the author’s implicit claim that a salary raise and a promotion are advantageous to making Professor Thomas stay is poorly supported. In this argument, no evidence is provided as the source of fear on Professor Thomas’s leaving, leave alone the loose relation between her leaving with the raise and promotion. Professor Thomas may never consider a leave probably because Elm City University is the only university in that area and she does and attempt to move due to some reason. Even if the fear on her leaving is not reasonless, it is entirely possible that her intention to leaving has no relevance to the salary and promotion. For all we know an adorable professor might show no concern about money and fame, she is believably intend to leave only because of the better research environment in another college. For that matter，the author’s assertion is pointless. Moreover, even supposing Professor Thomas takes salary and promotion under consideration, a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson still have the chance to be a worse offer compared another college. Without weighing the fear of professor’s leaving against the raise and promotion thoroughly, the argument’s conclusion is premature at best.

In conclusion, the recommendation for the salary raise and promotion for Professor Thomas is not well supported. To bolster the recommendation the author must provide better evidence that (1) Professor Thomas deserves and is suitable for a salary raise as well as a promotion (2) Professor Thomas is well worth her current annual salary, (3) the salary raise and promotion can prevent Professor Thomas’s hypothetical leaving. To better access the recommendation it would be useful to know the salary condition of Professor Thomas’s peers, whether she is sociable to be a Chairperson, the subjective evaluation on her teaching and researching abilities, and the possibility and reason for her to leave Elm City University.   

第一篇argument...我是跟着精华区‘argument就应该这样’的思路走的，firstly批第一个前提，secondly批第一个前提的论据，finally批第二个前提很其没有论据。结尾参考北美范文，不过我发现我的结尾纯属没话找话讲~
有几个问题：
1，我写的太长了，考试了肯定来不及，但是发现了问题不讲出来不爽，讲出来了又不能一句带过还要来点过渡啥的（不是说我把问题全找出来了或者有过渡。。。只是一个基本的concern）该怎么办？
2，按照”argument就应该这样写里面讲“先把重要的给批了，也就是先把前提给批了，再批论据，但是我怎么觉得有些题目很乱啊，全是前提（偶不才），而且用even if , even though让步的范文大有文在，到底是因该先写重要的还是先批零碎的，然后层层让步呢？

各位前辈同辈们劳神给点意见吧:) 谢谢谢谢谢谢

DemoUID: 2331967

只要段落之间条理清楚 每个点都批驳到位
怎么样组织批驳应该无所谓的吧.. 个人感觉..

ploploUID: 2320001

个人感觉有待推敲的说

DemoUID: 2331967

汗
无视偶吧... |||
只是觉得各有各的好处 米有必要纠缠哪个更正确...

solartorchUID: 2244205

看了一些帖子，觉得论证顺序问题争论已久，不过貌似 让步深入占了上风，因为看起来更顺一点，段与段之间的联系更自然一点，不然一上来就把主要的给批了，自己都觉得下面没有写的必要了。。。
不知道这样想对不对:eek:

totalsm45518UID: 2286658

The author recommends Professor Thomas receive a raise and a promotion based on two premises. One is that Professor Thomas is well worth her current annual salary, the other is she will probably leave Elm City University without these measures. However, correlations are lacking on the jump from the premises to the conclusion. In addition, the writer fails to present cogent reasoning for the establishment of premises.
                                       
Firstly, the author unwarranted assumes that as a professor of botany who is worth her current salary, Professor Thomas deserves a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson. The author provides no consideration about the average salary of Professor Thomas’s colleagues. Perhaps $50,000 has already been the highest salary among all the professors and has no precedent. In that case, the raise of salary would lead to discontent and should be seriously questioned. Additionally, the writer fails to take into account possible differences between academic competence and social ability. An eminent professor of botany may not able to success as a Department Chairperson. Hence, the recommendation on promotion is also in lack of solid ground.(就象你后面问道的，这里其实是两个主要的攻击点，一个是升工资，一个是升职，完全应该放在两段重点来说。)

Secondly, the evidences provided in the argument do not necessarily indicate that Professor Thomas is worth her current salary. Having some of the largest classes at the university may not due to her popularity among students. It is quite possible that the university’s curriculum and timetable lead to her large classes. Furthermore, the fact that in each of the last two years the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary can’t assure that in the future she can still efficiently secure the grant. Besides, her colleagues who receive the less salary might have brought more grant then her. Without ruling out these possible scenarios, the author cannot convince me that Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000（换成是升工资更好一些）

Finally, the author’s implicit claim that a salary raise and a promotion are advantageous to making Professor Thomas stay is poorly supported. In this argument, no evidence is provided as the source of fear on Professor Thomas’s leaving, leave alone the loose relation between her leaving with the raise and promotion. Professor Thomas may never consider a leave probably because Elm City University is the only university in that area and she does and attempt to move due to some reason. Even if the fear on her leaving is not reasonless, it is entirely possible that her intention to leaving has no relevance to the salary and promotion. For all we know an adorable professor might show no concern about money and fame, she is believably intend to leave only because of the better research environment in another college. For that matter，the author’s assertion is pointless. Moreover, even supposing Professor Thomas takes salary and promotion under consideration, a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson still have the chance to be a worse offer compared another college. Without weighing the fear of professor’s leaving against the raise and promotion thoroughly, the argument’s conclusion is premature at best.（这段写的太多太杂了，很混乱的感觉，可以删去一些）

In conclusion, the recommendation for the salary raise and promotion for Professor Thomas is not well supported. To bolster the recommendation the author must provide better evidence that (1) Professor Thomas deserves and is suitable for a salary raise as well as a promotion (2) Professor Thomas is well worth her current annual salary, (3) the salary raise and promotion can prevent Professor Thomas’s hypothetical leaving. To better access the recommendation it would be useful to know the salary condition of Professor Thomas’s peers, whether she is sociable to be a Chairperson, the subjective evaluation on her teaching and researching abilities, and the possibility and reason for her to leave Elm City University.   

觉得lz的语言词汇和语法结构真的是没的说啊，如果加强逻辑性肯定能得高分
个人觉得你论证得有点乱了，如果那些错误不是特别明显的主要次要，就按照顺序来比较好吧，个人意见
总之已经很好了，真的，我要好好向你学习。

solartorchUID: 2244205

谢谢totalsm45518的意见，我看了你的文章，五体投地的佩服你的速度，这是我现在最头疼的地方，没办法加快，要么就想不出来些什么，要么就错误百出。
关于论证的顺序问题，我由于一开始看了那个“argument就因该这样写”，所以都是拿到题目就分前提论据结论，然后按它里面讲的顺序批，当时写完以后自己还觉得条例挺清楚的，可是就像这篇我隔个几天再来看，自己都觉得有点混了，看来自己想得清楚不代表写出来以后能把别人带上你的思路来。
你的建议很好，按顺序，还是回到那种一段批一点的常规方法来比较符合看argument的人的思维方法:loveliness: 比较容易follow.;d:
谢谢啦:p