Argument 170，修路问题，真心望拍

80480650

Argument 170，修路问题，真心望拍

第一次写A，对instruction的要求不是狠了解，恳请大家先判断一下这篇A是不是符合instruction的要求，然后再尽情地痛批吧。。逻辑上可能落了主要的点，希望大家指点。





我的提纲：

1.所选的section没有代表性，另外两条路的使用情况可能不同。

2.没有Good Intentions Roadways的变化情况，无法判断Appian的变化就是占优势的。

3.prediction 的类比错误。。







Argument

题号：新GRE 170

题目：The surface of a section of Route 101, paved just two years ago by Good Intentions Roadways, is now badly cracked with a number of dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 40, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. In a demonstration of their continuing commitment to quality, Appian Roadways recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery and hired a new quality-control manager. Therefore, I recommend hiring Appian Roadways to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls. I predict that our Appian access roads will not have to be repaired for at least four years.

写作要求：Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.



The argument recommends that hiringAppian Roadways is a better option to construct the access roads for all our new shopping mall with an expectation that the access road will keep being in good shape for not less than four years. To support this recommendation, the speaker points out that the Route 101 by Good Intentions Roadways now comes to existence of quality problem while the Route 40 by Appian Roadways has not by far. The speaker also cites that the Appian Roadways recently procures some advanced machinery and recruits a new quality-control manager. The argument suffers from several logical flaws and is therefore unconvincing.



First off, Building on the comparison of the damaging extent of the Route 101 and that of Route 40, the speaker assumes that the Route 40 is of better quality apparently due to the construction by Appian Roadways. It is not clear, however, the representativeness of the sections selected to be compared. For example, perhaps if the section of Route 101 might be just of the lowest quality for roads which Good Intentions Roadways has built while that of Route 40 is just the reverse. Even assuming they are representative, what makes them difference might be that the traffic in Route 101 is much heavy while the route 40 might not be frequently used. Without ruling out these or other possibilities for cause of the different quality, it is impossible to determine which company is better.



Additionally, citing that the recent procurement of some advanced machinery and employment of a new quality-control manager, the author assumes that Appian Roadways pursues a higher quality for projects. To assure whether his/her assumption is valid, We need to ask, for example, if the procurement and employment just indicate that the facilities Appian Roadways utilized before were all outdate and that the frequent change of manager is due to the unwarranted project quality. If so, then the author’s assumption makes little sense. On the other hand, what about Good Intentions Roadways then? We just do not know, however, the promoted measures Good Intentions Roadways takes, if the Good Intentions Roadways has substituted all previous old equipment with more advanced ones, which renders the hard power more powerful than that of Appian Roadways, and if the project quality is monitored by a independent third-party which is specialized at quality supervision, thus making the results objective and more believable. Unless the speaker gives us more information about the two construction company, it cannot be used to efficiently back his/her argument that Appian Roadways is a better choice for construction.



Finally, the speaker make a prediction that the access roads built by Appian Roadways will not by repaired for at least four years based on the fact that the Route 40 built four years ago is still of good condition, however, the speaker commits a false analogy in assuming that the two kinds of road by same company would be identical. Common sense informs us that there are varieties of factors which could affect road quality such as traffic flow, climate and design and so forth.



In sum, the recommendation and prediction the speaker makes in this argument is invalid and misleading. To make it logically acceptable, the speaker would have to substantiate that it is the higher construction technique that makes the route 40 no damage rather than other factors and that Appian Roadways truly has a better system of quality supervision and more advanced construction equipment, moreover, I would suspend my judgment about the credibility of this argument until the author can provide more indicators which could reflect whether Appian Roadways is really better like its profits and business model.