ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2221|回复: 0
打印 上一主题 下一主题

8月机经作文一篇 还剩42小时上考场 求指导!!

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2013-9-7 18:40:48 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
还有两天考试,求指导AWA,感觉总是抓不准驳斥的点,求批求指正。
废话少说,直接上题。
谢谢谢谢。

题目:
Over the past decade, the price per pound of citrus fruit has increased substantially. Eleven years ago, Megamart charged 5 cents apiece for lemons, but today it commonly charges over 30 cents apiece. In only one of these last eleven years was the weather unfavorable for growing citrus crops. Evidently, then, citrus growers have been responsible for the excessive increase in the price of citrus fruit, and strict pricing regulations are needed to prevent them from continuing to inflate prices.”

正文:
The argument that the cirtus growers should be blamed for the huge increase of the cirtus price and the rigorous plices should be carried out to prevent the continuing increases omits several important concerns that to be addressed to substantiate the conclusion. The statement that follows the fact that the price of apiece rose form 5 cents to 30 cents, and only one year of the past 11 years suffered an unfavorable weather. The line of reasoning above, however, is groundless to make the conclusion persuasive for the following critical flaws.

First of all, the argument commits a fallacy of oversimplified relationship. It is ture that only one year of the recent 11 years suffers bad weather, but it cannot conclude that the citrus growers should respond for the increase of price. This is so unconvincing to point out the "therefore" relationship between these two things. It is likely that the unfavorable weather cannot account for the increasing price of the cirtus fruit, and the real factors can be the increasing demand of the cirtus and the decreasing output of the cirtus. Thus, the argument is unsounded to assert the "therefore" relationship.

On the top of that, the argument is extremely doubtful that the bad weather is the only factor to lead to the increase of the price. It is likely that other factors drive the price goes higher and higher, such as the shortage of yelid per acre of the cirtus fruit, the increasing amount of taxes required by the government, and even the drastic competition between the importer's products. Without wap out these possible factors cannot conclude to the statement that citrus growers have been responsible for the excessive increase in the price of citrus fruit.

Last but not least, the statement is unfounded to gurantee the strict regulations of pricing can prevent the pricing from continuing to inflate prices. It is likely that even the regulations are setted, but the increasing price of the price can also exsit for the farmers who are unwilling to obey the rules. In this way, even though the strict pricing polices exists, the inflate price won't stop increasing. Therefore, the conclusion is biased, it should be added other factors to make sure the desire outcome.

All in all, the argument is unsounded to conclude that citrus growers have been responsible for the excessive increase in the price of citrus fruit, and strict pricing regulations are needed to prevent them from continuing to inflate prices. Only with more evidence to prove the relationship bewtten the unfavorable weather and the increasing price, trim out other factors which are likely to lead to the increase of the price of the cirtus, and more factors to guarantee the desired outcome of the police can make the argument more persuasive and convincing.
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

IESE MBA
近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-22 05:30
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部