Agument140 [Victors小组]第3次作业

乳虎UID: 2251211

140The 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."
提纲
1Thomas教授的班级规模大并不能说明她课讲得好，受欢迎。
2Thomas教授筹集到的资金超过了她的工资并不能说明她科研能力强。
3作者没有有效证明不提工资，不提拔thomas教授就要跳槽。
Issue140

In this argument, the arguer recommends that Professor receive $10,000 raise and a promotion to department chairperson. In order to support his recommendation, he reasons that Professor Thomas's class which is the largest at the school proves the popularity and the superior teaching ability of Professor Thomas, besides the fact that the money Professor Thomas has brought to the university in research grant has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. As I see it, the argument involves several logical flaws which make it not so tenable as it stands.

In the first place, the argument relies on an insubstantial assumption that students listen to Professor Thomas's class because they like it.  Actually, which class students choose is not necessarily determined by their interest let alone their opinion to some teacher. It is likely that they choose a class just because they feel it simple, so they can get through the examination effortlessly. Unless the arguer excludes that possibility and other possiblities, he can not convince me.

In the second place, the fact that the money Professor Thomas has brought to the university in research grant has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years is little indication that she has superior research ability. Admittedly, research needs funds, but the ability to collect money does not demonstrate a people’s research ability. To estimate a people’s research ability, we must refer to his research achievement. Without credible evidence which indicates that Professor Thomas has superior research ability, we can not take seriously the arguer's recommendation.

Last but not the least, the argument provides no credible evidence indicating that unless such a raise and promotion, Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college. If only other collage would like to pay her higher salary, will Professor Thomas choose a new college. However, other college may pay her equivalent even lower salary, especially considering that Professor Thomas has serve Elm City University for seventeen years. Without such crucial important information, the argument turns out to be imprudent at least.

In conclusion, the argument contains some logical flaws, which make it unconvincing. In order to consolidate it, the arguer has to investigate the opinion of students about Professor Thomas. To assess the argument, we need know the performance of Professor in research. In addition, to decide whether Professor Thomas e will quick the job in Ell City University and serve other collage, we need know how much other colleges would like to pay her.   

jennetrjUID: 2275453

In this argument, the arguer recommends that Professor receive[s] [a] $10,000 [salary] raise and a promotion to department chairperson. In order to support his recommendation, he reasons that Professor Thomas's class which is the largest at the school proves the popularity and the superior teaching ability of Professor Thomas[ her] , besides[,] [the arguer cites] the fact that the money Professor Thomas has brought to the university in research grant has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. As I see it, the argument involves several logical flaws which make it not so tenable as it stands. In the first place, the argument relies on an insubstantial assumption that students listen to [assigned in]Professor Thomas's class because they like it.  Actually, which class students choose is not necessarily determined by their interest[,] let alone their opinion [on the][to some] teacher. It is likely that they choose a class just because they feel it simple, so they can get through the examination effortlessly. Unless the arguer excludes that possibility and other possiblities, he can not convince me. In the second place, the fact that the money Professor Thomas has brought to the university in research grant has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years is little indication that she has superior research ability. Admittedly, research needs funds, but the ability to collect money does not demonstrate a people’s research ability. To estimate a people’s research ability, we must refer to his research achievement. Without credible evidence which indicates that Professor Thomas has superior research ability, we can not take seriously the arguer's recommendation. Last but not the least, the argument provides no credible evidence indicating that unless such a raise and promotion, Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college. If only other collage would like to pay her higher salary, will Professor Thomas choose a new college. However, other college may pay her equivalent[equal] [or] even lower salary, especially considering that Professor Thomas has serve[d] Elm City University for seventeen years. Without such crucial [important] information, the argument turns out to be imprudent at least. In conclusion, the argument contains some logical flaws, which make it unconvincing. In order to consolidate it, the arguer has to investigate the opinion of students about Professor Thomas. To assess the argument, we need know the performance of Professor in research. In addition, to decide whether Professor Thomas [e] will quick[qiuit] the job in Ell City University and serve other collage, we need know how much other colleges would like to pay her.[前面已经否定了payment 与service 的因果关系，为何这里又承认了？]

引用  报告