GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-21

Topic:

The following appeared as part of an editorial in an industry newsletter.

“While trucking companies that deliver goods pay only a portion of highway maintenance costs and no property on the highways they use, railways spend billions per year maintaining and upgrading their facilities. The government should lower the railroad companies' property taxes, since sending goods by rail is clearly a more appropriate mode of ground transportation than highway shipping. For one thing, trains consume only a third of the fuel a truck would use to carry the same load making them a more cost-effective and environmentally sound mode of transport. Furthermore, since rail lines already exist, increases in rail traffic would not require building new lines at the expense of taxpaying citizens.

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

The conclusion of this editorial is that the government should lower property taxes for railroad companies. The first reason given is that railroads spend billions per year maintaining and upgrading their facilities. The second reason is that shipping goods by rail is cost-effective and environmentally sound. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons.

First of all, the argument depends upon a misleading comparison between rail road and truck company expenditures. Although trucking companies do not pay property tax on roads they use, they do pay such taxes on the yards, warehouses and maintenance facilities they own. And while trucking companies pay only a portion of road maintenance costs; this is because they are not sole users of public roads. Railroad companies shoulder the entire burden of maintenance and taxes on their own facilities and tracks; but they distribute these costs to other users through usage fees.

In addition, the author assumes that property taxes should be structured to provide incentives for cost-effective and environmentally beneficial business practices. This assumption is questionable because property taxes are normally structured to reflect the value of property. Moreover, the author seems to think that cost effectiveness and environmental soundness are equally relevant to the question of tax relief. However, these are separate considerations. The environmental soundness of a practice might be relevant in determining tax structuring, but society does not compensate a business for its cost-efficiency.

Splitting the issues of cost-efficiency and environmental impact highlights an ambiguity in the claim that railway shipping is more appropriate. On the one hand, it may be appropriate, or prudent, for me to ship furniture by rail because it is cost-effective; on the other hand, it might be appropriate, or socially correct, to encourage more railway shipping because it is environmentally sound. The argument thus trades on an equivocation between social correctness on the one hand, and personal or business prudence on the other.

In sum, this argument is a confusion of weak comparisons, mixed issues and equivocal claims. I would not accept the conclusion without first determining: (1) the factors relevant to tax structure, (2) whether specific tax benefits should accrue to property as well as to income and capital gains taxes, (3) whether railway shipping really does provide greater social benefits, and (4) whether it is correct to motivate more railway shipping on this basis.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-22

Topic:

The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper.

“As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana which is bulky or heroin which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment to cocaine. Thus enforcement efforts have ironically resulted in an observed increase in an illegal use of cocaine. ”

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

The conclusion m this argument is that increased vigilance by drug enforcement authorities has resulted in an increase in the illegal use of cocaine. The author reaches this conclusion on the grounds that drug traffickers have responded to increased enforcement efforts by switching from bulkier and riskier drugs to cocaine. Presumably, the author's reasoning is that the increased enforcement efforts inadvertently brought about an increase in the supply of cocaine which, in turn, brought about the observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine. This line of reasoning is problematic in two important respects.

In the first place, the author has engaged in " after this therefore because of this reasoning. The only reason offered for believing that the increased vigilance caused the increase in cocaine use is the fact that the former preceded the latter. No additional evidence linking the two events is offered in the argument, thus leaving open the possibility that the two events are not causally related but merely correlated. This in turn leaves open the possibility that factors other than the one cited are responsible for the increase in cocaine use.

In the second place, the author assumes that an increase in the supply of cocaine is sufficient to bring about an increase in its use while this is a tempting assumption, it is a problematic one. The presumption required to substantiate this view is that drug users are not particular about which drugs they use, so that if marijuana and heroin are not available, they will switch to whatever drug is available-cocaine in this case. The assumption does not seem reasonable on its face. Marijuana, heroin and cocaine are not alike in their effects on users; nor are they alike in the manner in which they are ingested or in their addictive properties. The view that drug users’ choice of drugs is simply a function of supply overlooks these important differences.

In conclusion, the author has failed to establish a causal link between increased enforcement efforts and the observed increase in illegal cocaine use. While the enforcement activities may have been a contributing factor, to show a clear causal connection the author must examine and rule out various other factors.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-23

Topic:

The following appeared in a speech delivered by a member of the city council.

“Twenty years ago, only half of the students who graduated from Einstein High School went to attend a college or university. Today, two thirds of the students who graduate from Einstein do so. Clearly, Einstein has improved its educational effectiveness over the past two decades. This improvement has occurred despite the fact that the school's funding when adjusted for inflation is about the same as it was twenty years ago. Therefore we do not need to make any substantial increase in the school's funding at the time.”

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

This speaker draws the conclusion that there is s no need to substantially increase funding for Einstein High School. To support this conclusion, the speaker claims that Einstein has improved its educational efficiency over the past 20 years, even though funding levels have remained relatively constant. His evidence is that two-thirds of Einstein's graduates now go on to college, whereas 20 years ago only half of its students did so. This argument suffers from several critical problems.

To begin with, we must establish the meaning of the vague concept “educational efficiency”. If the term is synonymous with the rate of graduation to college, then the statistics cited would strongly support the argument. But, normally we are interested in something more than just the numbers of students who go on to college from a high school; we also want to know how well the school has prepared students for a successful college experience-that is, whether the school has provided a good secondary education. Thus, for the speaker the term "educational efficiency" must essentially carry the same meaning as 'educational quality."

Given this clarification, one of the speaker's assumptions is that the rate of graduation to college has increased because Einstein is doing a better job of educating its students. However, the fact that more Einstein graduates now go on to college might simply reflect a general trend. And the general trend might have less to do with improved secondary education than with the reality that a college degree is now the standard of entry into most desirable jobs.

But even if the quality of education at Einstein had improved, would this be a compelling reason to deny Einstein additional funding? I don't think so. It is possible that the school has managed to deliver better education in spite 'of meager funding. Teachers may be dipping into their own pockets for supplies and other resources necessary for doing their job well. Perhaps the quality of education at Einstein would improve even more with additional financial support.

In sum, this argument does not establish the conclusion that additional funding for Einstein is unnecessary. To do so, the speaker would have to provide evidence that the quality of education at Einstein has improved. This could be done by examining student assessment scores or by tracking students through their college careers to see how many successfully graduate and find jobs. In addition, the speaker would also have to show that Einstein is doing a good job with adequate financial support, and not merely in spite of insufficient funding.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-24

Topic:

The following appeared in a memo from the customer service division to the manager of Mammon Savings and Loan.

“We believe that improved customer service is the best for us to differentiate ourselves from competitors and attract new customers. We can offer our customers better service by reducing waiting time in teller lines from an average of six minutes to an average of three. By opening for business at 8.30 instead of 9.00 and by remaining open for an additional hour beyond our current closing time, we will be better able to accommodate the busy schedules of our customers. These changes will enhance our bank's image as the most customer friendly bank in town and give us the edge over our competition.”

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

The customer-service division of Mammon Savings and Loan recommends that the best way for the bank to attract new customers and differentiate itself from its competitors is to improve its service to customers-specifically, by reducing waiting time in teller lines, opening for business 30 minutes earlier, and closing an hour later. These improvements, it is argued, will give the bank the edge over its competitors and make it appear more customer-friendly. For the most part this recommendation is well- reasoned; a few concerns must be addressed, however.

First, the author assumes that Mammon's competitors are similar to Mammon in all respects other than the ones listed. In fact, Mammon's competitors may be more conveniently located to customers, or offer other services or products on more attractive terms than Mammon. lf so, Mammon may not gain the edge it seeks merely by enhancing certain services.

Secondly, the author assumes that the proposed improvements will sufficiently distinguish Mammon from its competitors. This is not necessarily the case. Mammon's competitors may already offer, or may plan to offer, essentially the same customer service features as those Mammon proposes for itself. If so, Mammon may not gain the edge it seeks merely by enhancing these services.

Thirdly, the author assumes that Mammon can offer these improved services without sacrificing any other current features that attract customers. In fact, Mammon may have to cut back other services or offer accounts on less attractive terms, all to compensate for the additional costs associated with the proposed improvements. By rendering its other features less attractive to customers, Mammon may not attain the competitive edge it seeks.

In conclusion, Mammon's plan for attracting new customers and differentiating itself from its competitors is only modestly convincing. While improvements in customer service generally tend to enhance competitiveness, it is questionable whether the specific improvements advocated in the recommendation are broad enough to be effective.

 

GMAT ARGUMENT类作文范文-25

Topic:

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

“Two years ago, City L was listed 14th in an annual survey that ranks cities according to the quality of life that can be enjoyed by those living in them. This information will enable people who are moving to the state in which City L is located to confidently identify one place at least where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe and the arts flourish.”

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

The author concludes that City L has good schools, affordable housing, friendly people flourishing arts and a safe environment. To support this claim the author cites an annual survey that ranks cities according to quality of life. Two years ago City L was listed 14th in this survey. As it stands this argument is unconvincing.

First, the author fails to indicate what individual characteristics of cities were used as criteria for the ranking. To the extent that the criteria used in the survey were the same as the features listed by the author in the conclusion, the conclusion would be warranted. On the other hand, if the survey employed entirely different criteria for example, outdoor recreational opportunities or educational achievement levels of adult residents-then the author's conclusion would be wholly unwarranted.

Secondly, the author provides no indication of how each characteristic was weighted in the ranking. For example, City L may have far and away the most flourishing arts scene among the cities surveyed, but it may have poor schools, unfriendly people, and an unsafe environment. The extent to which the survey accurately reflects City L's overall quality of life in this case would depend largely on the relative weight placed on the arts as a factor affecting quality of life.

Thirdly, the author fails to indicate how many cities were included in the survey. The more cities included in the survey, the stronger the argument-and vice versa. For example, if 2,000 cities were surveyed, then City L would rank in the top one percent in terms of quality of life. On the other hand, if only 14 cities were surveyed then City L would rank last.

Finally, the author's conclusion depends on the questionable assumption that the conditions listed by the author have remained unchanged in City L since the survey was conducted two years ago. Admittedly, had ten years elapsed the argument would be even weaker. Yet two years is sufficient time for a significant change in the overall economy, the city's fiscal policies, its financial condition, or its political climate. Any of these factors can affect the quality of schools, the extent to which art is flourishing, or the cost of housing.

In conclusion, the author does not adequately support the conclusion. To strengthen the argument, the author must show that the criteria used in the survey were the same as the features listed in the conclusion and were weighted in a way that does not distort the picture in City L. To better assess the argument, we would also need more information about the cities included in the survey, as well as what changes in City L have occurred during the past two years.

嘉文博译郑重声明：