[Big Fish]03月01日Issue169--By swolf54

swolf54UID: 2421931

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 argument, based on a study conducted by Bronston College, the arguer reaches the conclusion that Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member they hire. In supporting his assertion, he also points out that the new police will attract the most gifted teachers and researchers and can improve their morale of their entire stuff. However, this argument is not convincing enough due to several vital fallacies made by the arguer.
         In the first place, the arguer makes a false analogy mistake. In other words, the arguer unfairly assumes that the condition of Bronston College is similarly with Pierce University. Perhaps the small town, where Bromston College settled, has more cheap houses available to the couples. Thus, the professors there can afford the cost after their spouses are employed in the same area and live together happily. However, Piece University's town might suffer from a relative high house price. Even if the university offers their spouses job opportunities, the high living cost still prevents their spouses from moving together, let alone a happy life. In short, for lacking of considering the possible differences between Bronston College and Pierce University, the arguer cannot convince me that offering spouses job is sound.
            Secondly, the arguer unfairly assume that providing spouse's jobs were attribute to attracting the most gifted professors. Lacking evidence to confirm this assumption, it is entirely possible that other factors will determine the most gifted professors' choice. Perhaps the funds for research, school's reputation and study atmospheres are the key facts the most gifted professors will take into account. Without considering and ruling out other possible reasons that affect the professors’ choices, we remain skeptical about the conclusion drew by the arguer.
            Thirdly, even if assuming that offering jobs to professors’ spouses could attract them to work for Pierce University and live a happier life, the arguer doesn’t provide information about the feasibility of this policy. On the one hand, offering more jobs raises the burden of Pierce University. On the other hand, granted that the jobs are provided by the local labor market, we are not sure that the local labor market could provide enough employment to the spouses.
          In conclusion, for several vital mistakes made by the arguer, he fails to make a sound argument for his assertion. In order to strengthen his ideas, he needs to make a clear comparison between Bronston College and Pierce University. What’s more, he needs to demonstrate the feasibility of this policy.