argument140 AWER小组，求拍

zhuzz05UID: 2355356

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."

In this argument, the speaker recommends that Elm city University should give Professor Thomas a $10.000 raise of her annual salary and a promotion to Department Chairperson. To support the recommendation, the speaker ponit out that her classes are among the largest at the university and the money she has brought to the univeristy in research grants has exceeded her salary in ench of the last two years. The speaker also claims that without such a raise and promotion, Professor Thomas may leave Elm City University for another collage. However, I find the argument unpersuasive in many aspects.

To begain with, the fact that professor Thomas’s classes are among the largest at the university lends on support to the argument. Perhaps that many students have to learn the knowledge about botany, and there are only a few professors of botany at the univeristy. The speaker fails to rule out other possibilities that may influence the size of the class. And the mere fact about the size of professor Thomas’s cannot demonstrate her popularity among students.

Similarly, the mere fact about the research grants also cannot demonstrate her research ability. The money she has brought to the university in research grants in only two year is insufficient evidene to support the argument. Perhaps that before the two years, she brought no money to the unveristy. And we also donnot know the money other professors of  boney have brought to the univeristy. Perhaps that other professors brought more money than professor Thomas. Lacking insufficient information, the argument is greatly weakened.

Even if that professor Thomas’ teaching and rersearch abilities are both excellent. She is a good professor, but she may not be a good department chairperson. The content of two jobs are different. Furthermore, there is no information shows that professor Thomas may leave Elm City University for another collage. Even if it is fact, the speaker also fails to prove that such a raise and promotion could retain she. What she mind may be environment of teaching and research, but not her annual salary and position. The argument as further weakened.

To sum up, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The speaker have to provide sufficient data to draw the conclusion that Elm city University should give Professor Thomas a $10.000 raise of her annual salary and a promotion to Department Chairperson.