|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
08 Dec 2020, 06:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hello gmaters! I worte the title in French to catch your eyes. Hope it made my post interesting haha.
So yes, criticize my AWA or correct it or both(
) please. I would appreciate a lot. I'm all ears!
“Reelect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, 70 percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, 5,000 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.”
<< In this advertisement, the author purports that reelecting Adams will improve the sate’s economy. To substantiate this conclusion, the author cites statistics showing that 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 in the state. Moreover, it is claimed that most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Also, the author further bolsters his conclusion saying that Zebulon, Adams’s opponent, would lead the state in wrong direction because he disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies. At first glance, the authors argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but close scrutiny reveals that the line of reasoning employed is invalid and hence the conclusion is likely to misleading due to several critical logic flaws.
First, the author purports that disagreeing with many of Adams’s economic policies would causes the state in the wrong direction. However, this claim is problematic because the author did not offer any additional information that Adams’s economic policies would lead the state in the right direction. Therefore, the author of the advertisement should provide proof that Adams’s policies will serve the state in the right direction to reinforce the contention.
Secondly, the statistics used to buttress the author’s assertion that Adams’s leadership is proven in improving the state’s economy is so powerless that it fails to support the conclusion. For example, there is possibility that Adams could improve all the statistics because he cased a recession early of his tenure. Also, it is highly likely that all the improvements were the results of previous governor’s work, which happened to work out during the tenure of Adams. All those possibilities shows that the author’s claim that the Adams is a proven leader questionable. Therefore, to buttress the author’s argument, he should underpin the given evidences with additional records that shows all were the contribution of Adams.
Finally, the author supports the conclusion based on misled syllogism. The author’s assumption behind this syllogism is that the most people’s belief is so accurate that the belief is trustable if most of people believe so. Therefore the author makes the argument that most of people said they believe that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected, and if most people believe so, it is a fact. Thus reelect Adams will improve the economy of the state. Not only this poll itself brings problem, such as credibility of the poll that worked only with politically biased citizens, but also the author used this evidence with a dubious assumption. Therefore, to remedy this issue, the author should provide additional information of the poll and his assumption.
To sum up, the author fails to provide adequate justification for this argument. Therefore, to make the conclusion of the argument more logically convincing, the author should include the above-mentioned recommendations as additional evidence. If so, the argument would be much more persuasive. >>
Thank you in advance!
So yes, criticize my AWA or correct it or both(
) please. I would appreciate a lot. I'm all ears!“Reelect Adams, and you will be voting for proven leadership in improving the state’s economy. Over the past year alone, 70 percent of the state’s workers have had increases in their wages, 5,000 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.”
<< In this advertisement, the author purports that reelecting Adams will improve the sate’s economy. To substantiate this conclusion, the author cites statistics showing that 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 in the state. Moreover, it is claimed that most of the respondents in a recent poll said they believed that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected. Also, the author further bolsters his conclusion saying that Zebulon, Adams’s opponent, would lead the state in wrong direction because he disagrees with many of Adams’s economic policies. At first glance, the authors argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but close scrutiny reveals that the line of reasoning employed is invalid and hence the conclusion is likely to misleading due to several critical logic flaws.
First, the author purports that disagreeing with many of Adams’s economic policies would causes the state in the wrong direction. However, this claim is problematic because the author did not offer any additional information that Adams’s economic policies would lead the state in the right direction. Therefore, the author of the advertisement should provide proof that Adams’s policies will serve the state in the right direction to reinforce the contention.
Secondly, the statistics used to buttress the author’s assertion that Adams’s leadership is proven in improving the state’s economy is so powerless that it fails to support the conclusion. For example, there is possibility that Adams could improve all the statistics because he cased a recession early of his tenure. Also, it is highly likely that all the improvements were the results of previous governor’s work, which happened to work out during the tenure of Adams. All those possibilities shows that the author’s claim that the Adams is a proven leader questionable. Therefore, to buttress the author’s argument, he should underpin the given evidences with additional records that shows all were the contribution of Adams.
Finally, the author supports the conclusion based on misled syllogism. The author’s assumption behind this syllogism is that the most people’s belief is so accurate that the belief is trustable if most of people believe so. Therefore the author makes the argument that most of people said they believe that the economy is likely to continue to improve if Adams is reelected, and if most people believe so, it is a fact. Thus reelect Adams will improve the economy of the state. Not only this poll itself brings problem, such as credibility of the poll that worked only with politically biased citizens, but also the author used this evidence with a dubious assumption. Therefore, to remedy this issue, the author should provide additional information of the poll and his assumption.
To sum up, the author fails to provide adequate justification for this argument. Therefore, to make the conclusion of the argument more logically convincing, the author should include the above-mentioned recommendations as additional evidence. If so, the argument would be much more persuasive. >>
Thank you in advance!
Moderators:
188 posts
