gmatAWA 习作

“In the first four years that Montoya has served as mayor of the city of San Perdito, the population has decreased and the unemployment rate has increased. Two businesses have closed for each new business that has opened. Under Varro, who served as mayor for four years before Montoya, the unemployment rate decreased and the population increased. Clearly, the residents of San Perdito would be best served if they voted Montoya out of office and reelected Varro.”

Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

思路：

错误的类比：事情相似但是发生的时间和环境不同

指标不具有代表性

In the local newspaper, the author asserts that the residents of San Perdito should replace Montoya  with Varro for a better city service. The author lists two reasons to support this view. The first reason is some indicators, such as the population, the unemployment, which are used to measure the city’s whole circumstance seem not quite well. And then the author made a comparison between M and V showing that Montoya ruined the good situation established by Varro, and thus concludes that M is not as capable as V when serves as mayor of the city of San Perdito. However, this argument’s line of reasoning is not convincing due to two vulnerable points listed as follows.

Firstly, those indicators mentioned in this editorial are not representative to prove that M behaves worse than V. The author assumes in the argument that there are no other reason resulting in the decrease in population and unemployment increase. Clearly, this assumption is ill-considered for it lacks further investigation and miss the process to rule out other possibility to identify the real reason that lead to this bad situation. Perhaps a natural disaster suddenly falls during the M’s term of service, vast victims die and therefore cause a sharp increase in unemployment, population decrease and collapse of the two business. Or perhaps a global depression appears when M is at his post. Therefore, it is unwarranted to simply confirm the conclusion that M’s capability cannot match Varro’s and Varro should be reelected to replace M.

Secondly, the argument has made a wrong comparison between M and V. Although they are both a mayor of a same city, different time period may indicate a completely different background and situation of the city. So the two different four-years terms are actually not comparable unless other vital factors that may affect the performance of the mayor are examined and ruled out. So, the author in fact put an invalid evidence trying to prove that M should be fired and V should be hired instead.

In conclusion, this argument is not well reasoned by the author. The proofs listed are either not thought over to exclude other possibilities or simply not comparable. To strengthen the argument the author should make further investigation and collect more concrete statistics to make sure no other possible reasons existed can generate the same result. In addition, the author should make sure that the two terms in different time period are comparable to each other.

“Advertising the reduced price of selected grocery items in the Daily Gazette will help you increase your sales. Consider the results of a study conducted last month. Thirty sale items from a store in downtown Marston were advertised in the Gazette for four days. Each time one or more of the 30 items was purchased, clerks asked whether the shopper had read the ad. Two-thirds of the 200 shoppers asked answered in the affirmative. Furthermore, more than half the customers who answered in the affirmative spent over $100 at the store.”

Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

思路：

时间段不够有代表性，

数据不能保证其真实性。

In this argument the author suggests the grocery stores in the Marston area that they should advertise for items on sale, since their sales will increase by this means. In order to support this view, the author then displays a study result conducted last month, in which majority of customers are attracted by ads, and half of them even spend a relatively large amounts to buy items at those stores. However, this argument is not well reasoned due to two vulnerable points.

Firstly, statistics mentioned in the argument are not representative enough to support the perspective that grocery stores can use ads to increase their sales. The time period is not long enough to rule out other special factors that can influence the whole sales. For instance, if there are a national festival during this short time period, or perhaps it’s exactly the time suitable for tourism, if those assumption are true, then clearly, the grocery stores’ sales are fairly possible to surge. Therefore, only one month’s result could not be used to confirm it is ads that help the final sales increase. Secondly, the author cannot simply say advertising is effective due to an oral investigation in only one store, this is unconvincing because researchers cannot ensure the authenticity of those affirmative answers. As we all know, it is possible among people to lie to researchers because of their own reasons. Maybe they just want to show their loyalty to this store, since the research adopts data from only one store, the possibility that it is man-made raise sharply.

In conclusion, this argument is unwarranted and not convincing enough to prove the conclusion that grocery stores can benefit from advertising of those items on sale, as the time period are not representative enough and the concrete data used for research cannot guarantee its authenticity. To strengthen this argument, the author should extend both the time span and pick a relatively larger and more convincing data sources as the basics to further analyses.

“Re-elect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, seventy percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, five thousand new jobs have been created, and six corporations have located their headquarters here. Most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Adams’s opponent, Zebulon, would lead our state in the wrong direction, because Zebulon disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies.”

Discuss how well reasoned... etc.

The advertisement for Adams suggests voters to vote Adams instead of another candidate. In support of this view, the author emphasizes the achievement which Adams has made and indicates those joyful increase and changes will maintain as expected as long as voters offer adams an opportunity to serve. Another reason listed to strengthen the perspective is that Adams ' competitor holds a different idea about the economic policies. Since Adams succeeded in the past, therefore, anyone who opposes his schemes cannot be trusted to serve for further economic development. This line of reasoning, however, is quite unwarranted due to the following two reasons.

To begin with, the author wrongly compares the known past with the unknown future. Although the target is the same: economic development, whether the achievement in the past can last forever is a question worth to suspect. The policies used may not be useful anymore unless all critical factors waiting for further investigation in depth and other constructive innovotive better plans  have been thought through and ruled out. Perhapovs Adams' policies fall behind during the next term of service and thus Z is a more rationable choice. In a word, there is no reason to identify the past glory will maintain without reasonable investigation and cautious comparison between the two candidates' ideas.

Moreover, the samples and the data about concrete economic development are not sufficient and representative enough as a proof that the economic in recent years indeed became better than before. Firstly, the time span is too short. Only one single year cannot illustrate a whole policy system is in correct direction and is effective in increasing the state's economy. And there are no relative yealy data as an objective reference to display the relative improvement and changes in certain aspects. Merely percentage points or concrete numbers cannot account for anything, leave alone the general discription,"had
increase in wages", as no one can ensure the real living level of those people is enhanced.

In conclusion, this argument is not completely sound. The author fails to exhibit a reletively longer and more objective statistics about econmic development under Adams administration and oversimplifies the causal relationship between the achievement in the past and the trend in the future. To strengthen this reasoning line, more authentic data should be submitted and that Adams can lead a better economic future should be further proved and explained.