Argument222

TOPIC: ARGUMENT222 - The following article appeared in a recent issue of a college newspaper.
"Among all students who graduated from Hooper University over the past five years, more physical science majors than social science majors found permanent jobs within a year of graduation. In a survey of recent Hooper University graduates, most physical science majors said they believed that the prestige of Hooper University's physical science programs helped them significantly in finding a job. In contrast, social science majors who found permanent employment attributed their success to their own personal initiative. Therefore, to ensure that social science majors find permanent jobs, Hooper University should offer additional social science courses and hire several new faculty members who already have national reputations in the social sciences."
WORDS: 360 TIME: 00:34:02 DATE: 2008-3-19 21:23:23

At first glance, it seems sound and convictive that Hooper University ought to offer additional social science courses and employ new distinguished professors in the social sciences, so as to guarantee that social science majors would find permanent jobs. However, close scrutiny of evidence unveils that this argument actually suffers from a few critical fallacies, which will be detailed discussed and respectively.

To begin with, over the past five years more physical science majors seized permanent careers than social science majors did within a year after they graduated from university, and the speaker owes this phenomenon to special physical science programs reported by students. However, the credibility of the survey is questionable. This survey is based on self-report, therefore participants might not tell the truth or students may mistakenly accentuate minor respect which is physical science programs. The arguer fails to consider the probability that permanent job opportunities of physical science in society are quite enormous and appealing, while there are much less demands of staffers who research social science. Thus, the conclusion would otherwise be weakened.

Secondly, the comparison between physical science students and social science students is incomplete and selective. The survey is not involved with the number of students who major in physics and those who major in social sciences. Perhaps physics majors are several times of social science majors, which explains why permanent jobs are found by physics college men.
Thirdly, the speaker fails to take into account that the differences in inner characteristics between physics adherents and social science fans. It's common sense that students who are used to rationally reasoning tend to fix their career and will not easily change jobs, while social science ones are more likely to be moved by societal issues and may not persist in working in a permanent environment.

In conclusion, the argument actually suffers from vital flaws as discussed above. To solidify the verdict, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the survey is fair and the number of students who major in physics is the same as the number of social science students, and further prove that the attitude towards career of these two distinct groups is equal.