[TSUBASA] 第二次作业 argument 169 by wildrose800331

wildrose800331UID: 2602131

WORDS: 435-> 492
TIME: 30 +5
DATE: 2009-6-26 7:27:52

The arguer, in this argument, recommends that Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member with expectation of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers and improving the morale of their entire staff. To solidify the recommendation, the author points out findings of some studies in Bronston College that professors are happier when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. In addition, the author presumes that the money invested in this effort will obviously be well spent because new professors will be more likely to accept their offers. However, the suggestion is oversimplified and premature to be true.
First and foremost, the analogy between Bronston College and Pierce University is incomplete and thus inexact. For one thing, the comparison does not refer to geographic similarity or distinction. Bronston College lies in a small town, which their professors may prefer; but it is unknown that Pierce University is located in a small town or a big city. For another, the analogy does not point out the role of offering employment to the spouses of professors in the matter of accepting positions as teachers and researchers. The studies merely reveal that professors are happier living with their spouses working in the same area, they do not uncover that their spouses' employment there is the vital or only reason for them to accept the positions in Bronston College. Thus it is illogical to deduce the necessity of Pierce University to offer employment to the spouses of potential faculty members.
Another weak and groundless deduction is based on the false assumption mentioned above that offering employment to the spouses of professors is important or even decisive for potential professors. The author firmly hold the opinion that if the spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept their offers and the money invested in this effort will absolutely be well allotted, which will turn out to be meaningless and fruitless.
Finally, granted that professors are attracted because of their offers in Pierce University, it is too early to guarantee that the most gifted teachers and researchers will join in and the morale of their entire staff will be improved. Most gifted potential staff of course would take more factors into consideration, covering funds of research, experiment availabilities and so forth. The morale of staff needs more ideological instilment and conscious efforts, such as incentives, model settings, prizes, praises and others.
In all, the conclusion reached in this argument is invalid and thus unconvincing. To make it more firmly solid, the author needs to strengthen the analogy by furnishing more information. Moreover, I would suspend my trust of the deduction made in the argument until the author gives more evidence to substantiate the causal relationship between the offers of employment to spouses and the improvement in the morale of their entire staff, otherwise, the author is just simply begging the question all the time.