argument169【today is the day】第五次作业by revealing

revealingUID: 2507748

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."

In this analysis, the department chairperson of Pierce University attempts to conclude that Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member who is hired, in order to attract the most gifted teachers and researchers. To justify the claim, the chairperson cites the studies conducted by Bronston College which reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. As it stands, the argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.

To begin with, it is obvious that the chairperson assumes that if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept the offers. But the problem is that Bronston College and Pierce University might be not similar enough to support the analogical deduction. Furthermore, if the number of professors who were surveyed in the studies is insufficient, in face of limited evidence the studies are doubtful. Therefore, we have good reasons to suspect if the studies conducted by Bronston College are representative enough for Pierce University to draw the conclusion.

In addition, even if the two schools have enough commonnesses and the studies are valid, it is hard to come to the conclusion either. The argument is unwarranted because of a hasty generalization. Whether new professors are attracted depends on not simply their spouses' employments but also other possible factors. For example, the research environment of the school is one important aspect. Or, if the reputation of school in society is not so good, it might be difficult to attract gifted teachers. Even the traffic condition is a concerned reason. Without considering and ruling out such alternative explanations, the chairperson cannot convince us the conclusion that new professors will be more likely to accept the offers.

Last but not least, the chairperson omits several other factors that might weaken the argument. The argument is based on a problematic assumption. The chairperson ignores the possibility that there are enough employments in the town where Pierce University is located so the school has no need to invest money in this job offer effort. Besides, maybe the payment of other jobs is much higher and the benefits are better than the ones offered by school so the professors cannot live happily if their spouses have a chance of school employment.

To sum up, the argument, while it seems logical at the first glance, has several flaws as discussed above. To strengthen the argument, the chairman would have to ensure that the two schools are similar enough. To better evaluate the argument, we should need more information about other possible reasons.