Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1207:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Join the conversation to learn more about INSEAD vs LBS
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. - Dec 16
08:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes! - Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
29 Apr 2022, 22:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi! If anyone could provide any quick feedback for the gmat essay I wrote, that would be much appreciated. Thank you!
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The aforementioned argument that people in general are not concerned as they were about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses on first glance appears to be fairly convincing. However, on further scrutiny of the argument and it's logical structure, a number of flaws become evident. Among the most pivotal of the shortcomings of the argument are its inability to address the assumptions and lack of information to substantiate its claims.
First of all, the argument fails to mention if Heart's delight had starting selling only organic fruits and vegetables in the 1960's due to concerns of well-being of people or simply due to the lack of resources of cheese. It is also possible that the store did not have enough funds to procure cheese. The argument also mentions that the cheeses have high butterfat content. The implication of a cause and effect relation of cheese and concern for people can not be considered unless we know additional information. Let us consider high butterfat content. Since a percentage is not mentioned, the number could have varied meanings. 10 gram butterfat out of 20 gram cheese? 10 grams butterfat out of 1 kilogram of cheese? The argument also does not state if Heart's delight is actually selling cheese which has a lower fat content than earlier? If that is the case, then it can not be concluded that people are not concerned about regulating their intake of fatty cheese
Second, we do not know how much cheese Heart's delight actually sells. What is the cheese actually make up for only 1% of the total sales? We also do not know if people are buying the cheeses for their personal consumption. What if people are buying fatty cheeses for their pets? The argument then again would be called into question.
Further, the argument mentions Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant with declining sales. What if healthy eating was not a major factor for the decline in sales? What if the primary reason was bad food, poor advertising or stiff competition from other newer vegetarian restaurants? The article's reasoning suffers from a sampling bias.
Moreover, the article mentions the owners of House of Beef to be millionaires. We don not know if the owners were already millionaires before they opened the restaurant. The article also fails to mention if House of Beef actually serves red meat dishes or it's only the name of the restaurant and it actually serves vegetarian dishes or protein-rich meat dishes.
Thus, without the consideration of the aforementioned points, the argument provides an incomplete picture which is not sufficient enough to substantiate its claims. Unless the claims have been backed up by the reasons mentioned above, it must be regarded as a biased opinion rather than a legitimate claim.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The aforementioned argument that people in general are not concerned as they were about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses on first glance appears to be fairly convincing. However, on further scrutiny of the argument and it's logical structure, a number of flaws become evident. Among the most pivotal of the shortcomings of the argument are its inability to address the assumptions and lack of information to substantiate its claims.
First of all, the argument fails to mention if Heart's delight had starting selling only organic fruits and vegetables in the 1960's due to concerns of well-being of people or simply due to the lack of resources of cheese. It is also possible that the store did not have enough funds to procure cheese. The argument also mentions that the cheeses have high butterfat content. The implication of a cause and effect relation of cheese and concern for people can not be considered unless we know additional information. Let us consider high butterfat content. Since a percentage is not mentioned, the number could have varied meanings. 10 gram butterfat out of 20 gram cheese? 10 grams butterfat out of 1 kilogram of cheese? The argument also does not state if Heart's delight is actually selling cheese which has a lower fat content than earlier? If that is the case, then it can not be concluded that people are not concerned about regulating their intake of fatty cheese
Second, we do not know how much cheese Heart's delight actually sells. What is the cheese actually make up for only 1% of the total sales? We also do not know if people are buying the cheeses for their personal consumption. What if people are buying fatty cheeses for their pets? The argument then again would be called into question.
Further, the argument mentions Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant with declining sales. What if healthy eating was not a major factor for the decline in sales? What if the primary reason was bad food, poor advertising or stiff competition from other newer vegetarian restaurants? The article's reasoning suffers from a sampling bias.
Moreover, the article mentions the owners of House of Beef to be millionaires. We don not know if the owners were already millionaires before they opened the restaurant. The article also fails to mention if House of Beef actually serves red meat dishes or it's only the name of the restaurant and it actually serves vegetarian dishes or protein-rich meat dishes.
Thus, without the consideration of the aforementioned points, the argument provides an incomplete picture which is not sufficient enough to substantiate its claims. Unless the claims have been backed up by the reasons mentioned above, it must be regarded as a biased opinion rather than a legitimate claim.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
30 Apr 2022, 13:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6
Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 2.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 2.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Good Luck
mobab
Hi! If anyone could provide any quick feedback for the gmat essay I wrote, that would be much appreciated. Thank you!
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The aforementioned argument that people in general are not concerned as they were about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses on first glance appears to be fairly convincing. However, on further scrutiny of the argument and it's logical structure, a number of flaws become evident. Among the most pivotal of the shortcomings of the argument are its inability to address the assumptions and lack of information to substantiate its claims.
First of all, the argument fails to mention if Heart's delight had starting selling only organic fruits and vegetables in the 1960's due to concerns of well-being of people or simply due to the lack of resources of cheese. It is also possible that the store did not have enough funds to procure cheese. The argument also mentions that the cheeses have high butterfat content. The implication of a cause and effect relation of cheese and concern for people can not be considered unless we know additional information. Let us consider high butterfat content. Since a percentage is not mentioned, the number could have varied meanings. 10 gram butterfat out of 20 gram cheese? 10 grams butterfat out of 1 kilogram of cheese? The argument also does not state if Heart's delight is actually selling cheese which has a lower fat content than earlier? If that is the case, then it can not be concluded that people are not concerned about regulating their intake of fatty cheese
Second, we do not know how much cheese Heart's delight actually sells. What is the cheese actually make up for only 1% of the total sales? We also do not know if people are buying the cheeses for their personal consumption. What if people are buying fatty cheeses for their pets? The argument then again would be called into question.
Further, the argument mentions Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant with declining sales. What if healthy eating was not a major factor for the decline in sales? What if the primary reason was bad food, poor advertising or stiff competition from other newer vegetarian restaurants? The article's reasoning suffers from a sampling bias.
Moreover, the article mentions the owners of House of Beef to be millionaires. We don not know if the owners were already millionaires before they opened the restaurant. The article also fails to mention if House of Beef actually serves red meat dishes or it's only the name of the restaurant and it actually serves vegetarian dishes or protein-rich meat dishes.
Thus, without the consideration of the aforementioned points, the argument provides an incomplete picture which is not sufficient enough to substantiate its claims. Unless the claims have been backed up by the reasons mentioned above, it must be regarded as a biased opinion rather than a legitimate claim.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
"In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Café, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
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.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
The aforementioned argument that people in general are not concerned as they were about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses on first glance appears to be fairly convincing. However, on further scrutiny of the argument and it's logical structure, a number of flaws become evident. Among the most pivotal of the shortcomings of the argument are its inability to address the assumptions and lack of information to substantiate its claims.
First of all, the argument fails to mention if Heart's delight had starting selling only organic fruits and vegetables in the 1960's due to concerns of well-being of people or simply due to the lack of resources of cheese. It is also possible that the store did not have enough funds to procure cheese. The argument also mentions that the cheeses have high butterfat content. The implication of a cause and effect relation of cheese and concern for people can not be considered unless we know additional information. Let us consider high butterfat content. Since a percentage is not mentioned, the number could have varied meanings. 10 gram butterfat out of 20 gram cheese? 10 grams butterfat out of 1 kilogram of cheese? The argument also does not state if Heart's delight is actually selling cheese which has a lower fat content than earlier? If that is the case, then it can not be concluded that people are not concerned about regulating their intake of fatty cheese
Second, we do not know how much cheese Heart's delight actually sells. What is the cheese actually make up for only 1% of the total sales? We also do not know if people are buying the cheeses for their personal consumption. What if people are buying fatty cheeses for their pets? The argument then again would be called into question.
Further, the argument mentions Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant with declining sales. What if healthy eating was not a major factor for the decline in sales? What if the primary reason was bad food, poor advertising or stiff competition from other newer vegetarian restaurants? The article's reasoning suffers from a sampling bias.
Moreover, the article mentions the owners of House of Beef to be millionaires. We don not know if the owners were already millionaires before they opened the restaurant. The article also fails to mention if House of Beef actually serves red meat dishes or it's only the name of the restaurant and it actually serves vegetarian dishes or protein-rich meat dishes.
Thus, without the consideration of the aforementioned points, the argument provides an incomplete picture which is not sufficient enough to substantiate its claims. Unless the claims have been backed up by the reasons mentioned above, it must be regarded as a biased opinion rather than a legitimate claim.
*****************************************************************************************************************************
Moderators:
