GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-91

Topic:

The following appeared in a proposal from the development office at Platonic University.

“Because Platonic University had difficulty in meeting its expenses over the past three years, we need to find new ways to increase revenues. We should consider following the example of Greene University which recently renamed itself after a donor who gave it $100 million. If Platonic University were to advertise to its alumni and other wealthy people that it will rename either individual buildings or the entire university itself after the donors who give the most money, the amount of donations would undoubtedly increase.”

Instructions:

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

Sample Essay

In this argument an analogy is drawn between Platonic University and Greene University. The author argues that to solve its economic problems, Platonic University should follow the example of Greene University, which was recently named after a wealthy donor, and offer to rename individual buildings or the university itself in exchange for donations. The author believes that since this tactic worked for Greene it would undoubtedly work for Platonic, and thus provide the much-needed revenue. This argument is questionable for several reasons.

In the first place, the argument rests upon the assumption that a revenue-producing strategy that works for one university will work for another as well. However, Greene and Platonic may not be sufficiently similar to warrant this assumption. For example, a small, rural university is less likely to have alumni who could afford to make significant donations than a large, urban university Lacking specific information about the makeup of the universities and their alumni, it is impossible to assess the likelihood that the strategy employed by Greene will work for Platonic as well.

In the second place, the author's argument rests upon the unwarranted assumption that the donor for whom Greene University was renamed made the donation because the university offered to name itself after him. Unfortunately, no evidence is offered to support this vital assumption. The converse of this assumption may actually be the case. That is, the university may have renamed itself after Greene because Greene made the donation. Since the revenue-producing strategy promoted by Platonic's development office depends on the former assumption and not the latter, it is highly questionable whether this tactic will produce the desired result.

In conclusion, the proposal put forth by Platonic's development office is not well founded. To strengthen the proposal the development office would have to show that Platonic University and its alumni was sufficiently similar to Greene University to warrant the analogy. In addition, it would be necessary to show that it was the offer to rename the university after the donor that prompted the donation and not the converse.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-92

Topic:

The following appeared as part of an article in the business section of a local newspaper.

“Hippocrene Plumbing Supply recently opened a wholesale outlet in the location once occupied by the Cumquat Cafe. Hippocrene has apparently been quite successful there because it is planning to open a large outlet in a nearby city. But the Cumquat Cafe, one year after moving to its new location, has seen its volume of business drop somewhat from the previous year’s. Clearly, the former site is a better business location, and the Cumquat Cafe has made a mistake in moving to its new address.”

Instructions:

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

Sample Essay

In this argument the author asserts that the former location of the Cumquat Cafe was better than the new one, and that Cumquat's move was a mistake. To support this assertion the author points out that since its move Cumquat's business volume has dropped, and that Hippocrene, a wholesale plumbing supply outlet that now occupies Cumquat's former location, has been successful. The author reasons that Cumquat's misfortune and Hippocrene's success are primarily attributable to their respective locations. This argument is problematic in several respects.

In the first place, no supporting evidence is offered for the assumption that Cumquat's failure and Hippocrene's success is due primarily to their location. While location is an important contributing factor to a businesses' success or failure, it is not the only such factor. Many other reasons such as business practices, advertising, or customer service could equally account for their failure or success.

In the second place, while location may have been a factor that contributed to the performance of these businesses, the reason may not have been the location itself but rather the suitability of the business to the location. For example, a welding shop or a lumber store located in a downtown metropolitan business district is unlikely to succeed simply because this type of business is obviously unsuitable to the location. On the other hand, a bank in the same location might be extremely successful simply because of its suitability to the location.

In the third place, the author's claim that Hippocrene has been successful at Cumquat's previous location is unwarranted. The fact that Hippocrene intends to open a new outlet is insufficient to establish this claim. It is possible that the plan to open a new outlet was prompted by a lack of business at the Cumquat location.

Finally, the author unfairly assumes that one year's time at the new location is adequate to conclude whether Cumquat made a mistake in moving to that location. It is entirely possible that given more time, perhaps another year or so, Cumquat will become profitable at the location. Common sense informs me that this is a distinct possibility, since it often takes more than one year for a restaurant to establish a customer base at a given location.

In conclusion, the author's argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the conclusion the author would have to evaluate other possible causes of the performance of the businesses and eliminate all except location as the cause in each case. Additionally, it would be necessary to show that location rather than suitability to a location was the cause of the success of Hippocrene and the failure of Cumquat.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-93

Topic:

The following appeared in the editorial section of a local paper.

“Applications for advertising spots on KMTV, our local cable television channel, decreased last year. Meanwhile a neighboring town's local channel, KOOP, changed its focus to farming issues and reported an increase in advertising applications for the year. To increase applications for advertisements its spots, KMTV should focus its programming on farming issues as well. ”

Instructions:

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

Sample Essay

In this editorial KMTV a local cable television channel, is urged to change its programming focus to farming issues in order to increase advertising revenues. The author's line of reasoning is that KOOP's change in focus was the cause of its increase in advertising and that since this tactic worked for KOOP it will work for KMTV as well. This line of reasoning is flawed in three important respects.

To begin with, the belief that the change in focus to farming issues was the cause of KOOP's increase in advertising applications is unfounded. The only evidence offered to support this belief is that the change in focus preceded the increase in applications. Unfortunately, this evidence is insufficient to establish the causal claim in question. Consequently, it is possible that KOOP's change in focus may not have been related to its increase in revenue in the manner required by the author's argument.

In addition, the author assumes that the towns that KMTV and KOOP serve are sufficiently similar to warrant a conclusion based on an analogy between them. Even if we accept the view that KOOP's change in programming focus to farming issues was responsible for its increase in advertising applications, differences between the towns could drastically alter the outcome for KMTV For example, if KMTV serves a metropolitan area with little interest in agriculture, changing its programming focus to farming issues would most likely be disastrous. Lacking information about the towns KOOP and KMTV serve it is difficult to assess the author's recommendation.

Finally, the author assumes that KMTWs decrease in applications for advertising was due to its programming. However, since the author provides no evidence to support this assumption, it may be that the decrease was caused by other factors, such as a recession in the local economy or transmission problems at the station. Without ruling out these and other possible causes the author cannot confidently conclude that KMTWs programming was responsible for the decrease in advertising applications at that station.

In conclusion, the author's argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to provide additional evidence for the claim that KOOP's change in focus was responsible for its increase in advertising applications and that KMTWs decrease in applications was due to its programming. Furthermore, it would be necessary to show that the towns that KOOP and KMTV serve are sufficiently similar to justify the analogy between them.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-94

Topic:

The following appeared as part of an article in a computer magazine.

“A year ago Apex Manufacturing bought its managers computers for their homes and paid for telephone connections so that they could access Apex computers and data files from home after normal business hours. Since last year, productivity at Apex has increased by 15 percent. Other companies can learn from the success at Apex. Given home computers and access to company resources, employees will work additional hours at home and thereby increase company profits. ”

Instructions:

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

Sample Essay

In this article the author attributes Apex Manufacturing's 15 percent increase in productivity over the past year to its decision to equip its managers with computers and paid telephone connections for their homes so that they could access company computers and files from home after normal business hours. On the basis of Apex's experience the author recommends that other companies follow Apex's example and provide computers and access to company resources to their employees. The author believes that such a policy would increase productivity and profits for other companies, just as it did for Apex. The author's line of reasoning is questionable for several reasons.

First, the author assumes that Apex's increase in productivity is due to its equipping its managers with home computers and access to company resources. However, the only evidence offered in support of this claim is the fact that Apex's increase in productivity occurred after the home computers and after-hours access was provided. Unfortunately, this evidence is insufficient to establish the causal claim in question. While temporal precedence is one of the conditions required to establish a causal relationship between two events, by itself it is not a sufficient condition. Consequently, it is possible that Apex's increase in productivity is not related to its decision to equip its managers with computers and after-hours access in the fashion required by the author's argument.

Second, the author assumes that Apex and other companies are sufficiently similar to warrant a conclusion based on an analogy between them. Even if we accept the view that Apex's increase in productivity was brought about by its policy of enabling its managers to work from home, differences between Apex and other companies could nullify this result. Lacking detailed information about Apex and the other companies in question it is difficult to assess the author's conclusion.

In conclusion, the author's argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to provide additional evidence for the claim that Apex's decision to provide its managers with home computers and access to company resources was responsible for its increase in productivity. Furthermore, it would be necessary to show that Apex and other companies are sufficiently similar to justify the analogy between them.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-95

Topic:

The following was excerpted from an article in a farming trade publication.

“Farmers who switched from synthetic to organic farming last year have seen their crop yields decline. Many of these farmers feel that it would be too expensive to resume synthetic farming at this point, given the money that they invested in organic farming supplies and equipment. But their investments will be relatively minor compared to the losses from continued lower crop yields. Organic farmers should switch to synthetic farming rather than persist in an unwise course. And the choice to farm organically is financially unwise, given that it was motivated by environmental rather than economic concerns. ”

Instructions:

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

Sample Essay

In this article the author recommends that farmers who switched from synthetic to organic farming last year should switch back to synthetic farming as soon as possible. Citing a decline in crop yields as the primary reason for the recommendation to reverse course, the author predicts that crop yields for organic farmers will continue to be lower unless synthetic farming is resumed. Moreover, the author argues that organic farming is not a financially viable choice for farmers in any case because it is motivated by environmental, not economic, concerns. The author's position is unconvincing for several reasons.

First, there is no evidence that the first-year yields of farmers who switched to organic farming are representative of their future yields. Common sense would lead one to expect that first-year yields would be lower simply due to the inexperience of farmers accustomed to synthetic farming methods. Moreover, other factors such as weather or infertile seed stock could be responsible for the lower yields. Since the author does not address these or other factors that could account for the lower yields, his prediction that yields will continue to be lower unless a switch is made back to synthetic farming is not well founded.

Second, the author assumes that economic and environmental concerns are mutually exclusive and that only enterprises motivated by economic concerns are financially rewarding. These assumptions are not supported in the argument. Moreover, there are good reasons to suspect they may be false in the case at hand. For example, while it may be true that synthetic farming methods produce significantly higher yields in the short term, it may also be the case that they fail to sustain this yield in the long term, whereas the opposite is true for organic methods. If this were the case, the financial advantage of synthetic over organic methods would be illusory.

In conclusion, the author's prediction that yields will continue to be lower for farmers who adopt organic farming methods is not well reasoned. To strengthen this forecast it would be necessary to examine and eliminate other possible factors that could account for the lower yields experienced. Lacking a full examination of these factors, it is difficult to accept the author's position. Finally, the author's view that organic farming is financially unwise is completely unsupported.

嘉文博译郑重声明：