|
题目：ARGUMENT140 - 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：451 用时：0:40:00 日期：2007-08-07 In this argument, the arguer suggests that Professor Thomas should get promoted while her salary be raised because of her demonstrated teaching and research abilities. But while proving her ability of teaching and doing research, the arguer just provides the number of her classes and mentions the money her brought in research had exceeded her salary in each of the last two years, which means little to prove so. Besides that, the arguer suggests a 10000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson without reasoning out why such specific action should be made, but the unrelated fear of having Professor Thomas left the university. So from these we can see the argument suffers from many fallacies. To begin with, the argument is based on lots of assumptions. Firstly The arguer just pointed out that Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of 50000 in her seventeen years working period without giving any specific reasons. So we do not know whether she is really worth her salary now. Secondly, the arguer assumes that because her classes are among the largest, she is popular among students. But there are other alternative explanations for that, for instance, the number of botany teachers here is too small to cover all the needs of students, so students have to choose her class even she teaches not very well. Last but not least, the arguer assumes that without the promoting and the raise, the professor will probably leave the university. But considering the fact that the professor have worked in the university for seventeen years, it is kind of impossible for her to leave the school for not getting a promotion and a raise. So these are all the assumptions which can not be lead to the conclusion. Additionally, another fact for proving the teacher's ability is not reasonable. The grants she brought to the university has little to do with her research ability. Maybe it is because the fame of the university or the good initiative of the project itself which brought the money in. And the grants usually exceeds professor's salary, which should not have been mentioned here as her unusual contribution. Lastly, the arguer just suggests the specific raise and promotion without providing any evidences of doing so. Why not just a raise or why not just raise 5000? So without any convincing reasons, we can not accept the arguer's recommendation. Simply put, the argument is not as reasonable as it stands. To make it more acceptable, the arguer should provides the detailed reasons why the professor should get such a specific raise and promotion. In addition, more information should be provided about the professor’s contribution to the university. | 
GO
发表于 2007-8-7 01:52:42
0
转发
