argument140 "决战830拍砖组™"8月21日作业 高频狂练,请兄弟们狂拍

林森森UID: 163922

Argument140  
------摘要------
411 words
------题目------
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.'
------正文------
Merely based upon the dubious and unfounded evidence, the arguer attempts to convince the Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University (ECU) that Professor Thomas should receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion. To substantiate his claim, the arguer indicates that Professor Thomas' research abilities are extraordinary. In addition, he assumes that without such raise and promotion, Professor Thomas will leave ECU. As the argument stands, several important concerns, which the arguer fails to consider, may undermine the line of reasoning.

The first and most glaring err in logic lies in the fact that the popularity of Professor Thomas does not represent the academic ability of her. It is wholly possible that Professor Thomas is so fun that all her students like the way she transmits knowledge. However, the effect lies under the popularity is not mentioned, which is somewhat dubious. Maybe it is only the method what the students are in favor of and thus lead to her popularity, however, the students can really learn little academic things from her. Thus, the popularity among even the largest classes can represent nothing related to Professor Thomas' worth.

Another important failure is that the money Professor Thomas brought to the university in research grants does not represent her research ability.  Suppose the relationship of Professor Thomas with those who support them is intimate. And hence we can only say that her social ability instead of research ability is outstanding. Thus, it is fallacious to conclude that the money brought to the ECU which exceeded her salary directly indicates her demonstrated teaching and research abilities.

Furthermore, as the assumption goes that Professor Thomas will leave ECU without a raise and promotion, it proves fundamentally invalid. Because, as the argument has not concerned, whether Professor Thomas herself asked for a raise or promotion? Probably not, I suppose. Since the narration goes that she is already popular in the largest class, which infer that it is probably she also loves her students and enjoys teaching there. It is most possible that the interest instead of salary or identity attracts Professor Thomas to teach in ECU. And in conclusion, maybe she will not leave ECU though there is not raise or promotion.

In summary, the reasoning seems rational without further examination. The conclusion reaches in this argument proves misleading and invalid. To better evaluate this argument, we need more valid evidence to confirm that Professor Thomas is indeed extraordinary in research ability and worth the salary raise and promotion.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-21 at 14:14 ]

zhizhiUID: 2123761

Merely based upon the dubious and unfounded evidence, the arguer attempts to convince the Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University (ECU) that Professor Thomas should receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion. To substantiate his claim, the arguer indicates that Professor Thomas' research abilities are extraordinary. In addition, he assumes that without such raise and promotion, Professor Thomas will leave ECU. As the argument stands, several important concerns, which the arguer fails to consider, may undermine the line of reasoning.(开头感觉很好 一下子有了自己的风格 很赞的说！)

The first and most glaring err in logic lies in the fact that the popularity of Professor Thomas does not represent the academic ability of her. It is wholly possible that Professor Thomas is so fun that all her students like the way she transmits knowledge. （这好像也算是教学能力的一个方面吧 不够有说服力）However, the effect lies under the popularity is not mentioned, which is somewhat dubious. Maybe it is only the method what the students are in favor of and thus lead to her popularity, however, the students can really learn little academic things from her. Thus, the popularity among even the largest classes can represent nothing related to Professor Thomas' worth.

Another important failure is that the money Professor Thomas brought to the university in research grants does not represent her research ability.  Suppose the relationship of Professor Thomas with those who support them is intimate. And hence we can only say that her social ability instead of research ability is outstanding. Thus, it is fallacious to conclude that the money brought to the ECU which exceeded her salary directly indicates her demonstrated teaching（去掉 the arguer does not try to demonstrate her teaching ability with this evidence呵呵） and research abilities.

Furthermore, as the assumption goes that Professor Thomas will leave ECU without a raise and promotion, it proves fundamentally invalid. Because, as the argument has not concerned, whether Professor Thomas herself asked for a raise or promotion? Probably not, I suppose. Since the narration goes that she is already popular in the largest class, which infer that it is probably she also loves her students and enjoys teaching there. It is most possible that the interest instead of salary or identity attracts Professor Thomas to teach in ECU. And in conclusion, maybe she will not leave ECU though（感觉换成even though 更好一些 though 好像只有虽然的意思 even though 才表示纵然 就算是 的语气把） there is not raise or promotion.

In summary, the reasoning seems rational without further examination. The conclusion reaches in this argument proves misleading and invalid. To better evaluate this argument, we need more valid evidence to confirm that Professor Thomas is indeed extraordinary in research ability and worth the salary raise and promotion.

总体感觉进步突飞猛进阿 呵呵 :)文章整体结构和语言都很不错 也有了适合自己的模板
再接再厉！！

felixyangUID: 199223

Merely based upon the dubious and unfounded evidence, the arguer attempts to convince the (Committee on) Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University (ECU) that Professor Thomas should receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion. To substantiate his claim, the arguer indicates that Professor Thomas' research abilities are extraordinary. In addition, he assumes that without such a raise and promotion, Professor Thomas will leave ECU. As the argument stands, several important concerns（relationships）, which the arguer fails to consider, may undermine the line of reasoning.(开头还好，最后一句稍微拗口点，提一个小疑问，那个which句是插入语还是定语从句？做插入语去掉which,作定语去掉comma，呵呵，我也不怎么确定，水平很一般的说…)
The first and most glaring err in logic lies in the fact that the popularity of Professor Thomas does not represent the academic ability of her[/color].(her classes are among the largest does not indicate that her popularity, let alone her teaching ability) It is wholly possible that Professor Thomas is so fun that all her students like the way she transmits knowledge. （到了这里，你可以说可能是学校硬性规定绝大多数的学生必须选植物学的课，才导致了他的课人很多）However, the effect lies under the popularity is not mentioned, which is somewhat dubious. Maybe it is only the method what the students are in favor of and thus lead to her popularity, however, the students can really learn little academic things from her. Thus, the popularity among even the largest classes can represent nothing related to Professor Thomas' worth.（这第一个论证有问题啊）

Another important failure (fallacy) is that the money Professor Thomas brought to the university in research grants does not represent her research ability.  Suppose the relationship of Professor Thomas with those who support them is intimate. And hence we can only say that her social ability instead of research ability is outstanding. Thus, it is fallacious to conclude that the money brought to the ECU which exceeded her salary directly indicates her demonstrated （teaching and 呵呵，上面的哥们改得很对哦）research abilities.

Furthermore, as the assumption goes that Professor Thomas will leave ECU without a raise and promotion, it proves fundamentally invalid. Because, as the argument has not been(这里是不是少个been，concern的用法？比如：we are concerned only with one kind of cost.还有什么As far as I am concerned) concerned, whether Professor Thomas herself asked for a raise or promotion? Probably not, I suppose. Since the narration goes that she is already popular in the largest class, which infer that it is probably she also loves her students and enjoys teaching there. It is most possible that the interest instead of salary or identity attracts Professor Thomas to teach in ECU. And in conclusion, maybe she will not leave ECU though（even if/ even though） there is not raise or promotion.

In summary, the reasoning seems rational without further examination.(第一句不像结论句，直接说它错，不要跟美国人拐弯抹角的哦) The conclusion reaches in this argument proves misleading and invalid. To better evaluate this argument, we need more valid evidence to confirm that Professor Thomas is indeed extraordinary in research ability and worth the salary raise and promotion.

个人意见，呵呵，今天批完两篇了，呵呵，加我为组员，嘿嘿
对了，有空帮我看看前面一页的issue208，我水平低哇！

bythewayUID: 2120441

Merely based upon the dubious and unfounded evidence, the arguer attempts to convince the Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University (ECU) that Professor Thomas should receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion. To substantiate his claim, the arguer indicates that Professor Thomas' research abilities are extraordinary. In addition, he assumes that without such raise and promotion, Professor Thomas will leave ECU. As the argument stands, several important concerns, which the arguer fails to consider, may undermine the line of reasoning.(开头不错！)

The first and most glaring（哈哈，这个词用得好夸张啊。闪闪发光的错误。。。） err in logic lies in the fact that the popularity of Professor Thomas does not represent the academic ability of her. It is wholly （感觉这个词不是很贴切） possible that Professor Thomas is so fun （funny吧）that all her students like the way she transmits knowledge. However, the effect lies under the popularity is not mentioned, which is somewhat dubious. Maybe it is only the method what the students are in favor of and thus lead to her popularity, however, the students can really learn little academic things （换一下） from her. Thus, the popularity among even  （even用得不太好吧。。。）the largest classes （感觉这半句表述不好， 直接说 the popularity 或是 the largest class 就行了阿。） can represent nothing related to Professor Thomas' worth（不要说那么绝对嘛，多人喜欢肯定是好，只要说不是评价教学能力的最关键因素就行了。）.

Another important failure is that the money Professor Thomas brought to the university in research grants does not represent her research ability.  Suppose the relationship of Professor Thomas with those who support them is intimate. And hence we can only say that her social ability instead of research ability is outstanding. Thus, it is fallacious to conclude that the money brought to the ECU which exceeded her salary directly indicates her demonstrated teaching and research abilities.（这段不错啊，再用一些细节来说就更好了。）

Furthermore, as the assumption goes that Professor Thomas will leave ECU without a raise and promotion, it proves fundamentally invalid.（好！） Because, as the argument has not concerned, whether Professor Thomas herself asked for a raise or promotion? Probably not, I suppose. Since the narration goes that she is already popular in the largest class, which infer that it is probably she also loves her students and enjoys teaching there. It is most （？）possible that the interest instead of salary or identity attracts Professor Thomas to teach in ECU. And in conclusion, maybe she will not leave ECU though  （even though 好点吧？）there is not raise or promotion.

In summary, the reasoning seems rational without further examination. The conclusion reaches in this argument proves misleading and invalid. To better evaluate this argument, we need more valid evidence to confirm that Professor Thomas is indeed extraordinary in research ability and worth the salary raise and promotion.

总体感觉还不错啊，逻辑层次挺清晰的。语言再注意一下就更好了。多多加油啊！
要是有时间的话帮我看一下
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=323428
帮人拍了他居然不回拍，郁闷。。。

cruiserjiaUID: 2102784

你不是说法短信给你吗？怎么没有手机号？