argument140 [kb9.11] 第7次作业

prophetluoUID: 2240098

The conclusion that Professor Thomas shouldreceive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson , who was considerto be leave Elm City university without such a raise andpromotion. To support the notion, the arguer presents an evidence that theprofessor's class are among the largest at the university demonstrating herpopularity among students. In addition, the research grants she has brought tothe university has exceeded her salary. a careful examination of the argumentwould reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

In the first place, the argument is base ona false conjecture. The arguer hold an opinion that the Professor Thomas wouldleave the university ,however, the background information of the professor thatthe arguer given did not show any motion of her demission . What the arguerconsider may be the illusion of  himself,because the reason below.  The professorhas been in the university for seventeen years as a botany so she may be very happyto live and work in the campus. Commonsense teach us that a person who live inone place for a long time, will not be willing to move from one place toanother, in other words, they do not want a flux life , however the time theysaved from moving would be used in what their favorites. In that case , the possibilityof leaving from the university need to be doubted.

In the second place, even if we accept thefact the professor would leave the University if the $10000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson were notpromitted, there still some question about the teaching and research abilities.Firstly the arguer points that the professor' class are among the largest atthe university, however the mere evidence can not lead to a convined conclusionthat her was popular among the students. There are many ways to explain thephenomenon that the her classes are very large. For example, the classes  may be the required courses that everyoneneed to take , and she may be very clement to the student's scores ,whereas thosemight be the main reasons that her classes ware one of the largest ones.Secondly, a evidence that Thomas  hasbrought to the university  in researchgrants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years  was provided in order to justify the researchability of her is at a high level. Unfortunately, there is no one simply equatethe money with teaching ability except the arguer because if Thomas, born in afamous family, have many opportunity met a large amount of entrepreneurs whocan offer her a lot of money for her research ,the money she brought justequate her sociability. At the same time the arguer should present sufficientevidence that  the production of herresearches were among the most famous at the university.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibilitybecause the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to whatthe arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument , the arguer would have toprovide more evidence concerning the dismissing willing  of the professor . To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding the production of Thomas and thedetails of her classes .