argument52

hshansongUID: 2358850

52The following appeared in a memo to the human resources manager at Baobob Inc., a large architectural firm.

"Several well-known, retired architects were interviewed in Architecture Today about changes in the field. Only one had earned a college degree in architecture. All others had come into the field at an early age by serving apprenticeships that required them to work under the direct supervision of an experienced architect. Several of the colleges that we recruit from report that many promising architecture students leave school early in their undergraduate career. Therefore, because finding talented architecture graduates is becoming more difficult, Baobob Inc. should start an aggressive apprenticeship program and hire students who express an interest in architecture directly out of high school rather than wait for them to get out of college."



In this memo, the manager recommends that Baobo Inc. should start an apprenticeship program and hire students who are interested in architecture from high school. To support the recommendation the manager cites some facts and analysis. The argument is problematic in several respects, rendering the argument unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the argument unfairly assumes that Baobob inc. can cultivate good architects by an apprenticeship program. Owing to apprentices working under the direct supervision of an experienced architect, there are some factors, including the ability of apprentices, the skill's level of master, and the circumstances of corporate, which influences whether apprentices are able to be good architects. Lacking evidence that Baobob Inc. has ability to foster a good architect through such an apprenticeship program the argument remain unconvincing.

Secondly, the recommendation relies on the unpersuasive interview among several well-known, retired architects that only one had gained a college degree in architecture and others started working by serving apprenticeships.  Perhaps that these retired architects' experiences which may only reflect the situation of past are not always the same with those of today. Moreover, Lacking the evidence indicate whether Architecture Today is an authoritative media and what their standard of the interviewee are the argument cannot convince me that a good architect come into the field by serving apprenticeships.

Thirdly, the report that many promising architecture students leave school early in their undergraduate career is problematic in two respects: First, students who have stayed in the school may be also good architects in the future. Secondly, those who have left school do not have to engage in the architecture field, and perhaps they work in other field.


In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it the author must provide better evidence that cultivating architects by itself  is feasible. Moreover, i would need more information about the proportion of good architects who have no college degree and  whereabouts of those students who leave school early in their undergraduate career.