Re: New to GMAT Club - Post Your Questions Here
[#permalink]
Updated on: 21 Jan 2023, 10:03
Can someone evaluate my essay?
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
The factory of the future will be very different. Cleverer design software greatly speeds up product development. The same software can be used to program automated machine tools and more dexterous robots. New materials, like carbon fibre and nanoparticles, result in entirely new production processes. And additive manufacturing, popularly known as 3D printing, promises to demolish economies of scale. With labour costs becoming a less important factor in modern manufacturing, where will factories go? Some manufacturers have already relocated Asian production back to America and Europe, in part to be closer to their markets and to respond more rapidly to demand. Will this become a significant trend?
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
The argument claims that factories will become very different in the future , with cleverly designed automations replacing the majority of manual labour . Hence , labour costs are expected to become more and more irrelevant over the passage of time, with better manufacturing technology reducing the need of manual labour in modern factories. However ,stated in this way the argument reveals examples of leap of faith, poor reasoning, and ill-defined terminology. Clearly, the conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Thus, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
Firstly, the argument readily assumes that labour costs will become less important , while implying that automated machines will replace the need for manual labour. This argument is a stretch and is not substantiated in any way. To illustrate , in food manufacturing factories , manual workforce is needed to cook , bake , mix and heat up raw materials so that they can be made into a finished product for commercial sales. Moreover, although machines are capable of performing miscellaneous tasks like packaging and sanitising , a manufacturing workforce is still needed to ensure the quality of the packaged product. Additionally, periodic maintenance is imperative to ensure seamless manufacturing , hence , a maintenance team is needed to be held on standby to perform repairs for the machines on an ad hoc basis. Also, guards needed to be stationed to preside over the factory and prevent instances of vandalism and theft . Besides, managerial teams are required to preside over the factory so as to ensure adherence to standard procedures and sustain the overall quality of manufactured goods. Consequentially , the implications of the argument are unfounded . Hence , the argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly elaborates how better manufacturing technology entails the redundance of human workforce.
Secondly, the argument claims that technologies like additive manufacturing will abolish economies of scale. Again, this is a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between better manufacturing technologies and economies of scale. To illustrate , 3D printers require one to create the design for an object from scratch using a CAD program . Furthermore, ink replacement for 3D printers requires a trained pair of hands , as otherwise the ink cartridge will not be properly installed, resulting in ink leaks. All these prove that a manual workforce is indispensable and will always form part of the operating costs of a factory. If the argument presents a clear correlation between innovative technology and reducing labour costs , the author would have sounded more convincing.
Thirdly, the argument claims that the reduction of human labour will become a significant trend which will persists well into the future. From this statement again , it is not clear how improvements in technology will preclude the need for human workforce , as although the need for manual labour is reduced there is always a need for engineers to perform maintenance and other various tasks. In fact , it also raises a question on the range of tasks machines can perform in the stead of humans. .Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.
Originally posted by
ewanleeyz on 21 Jan 2023, 10:00.
Last edited by
ewanleeyz on 21 Jan 2023, 10:03, edited 1 time in total.
close
Good luck 
hahahahaha, Well, you will learn soon enough that there’s a huge cost to that! Like I said, "TIME!!!!!!" TIME IS MONEY!!!!! So that’s the price you pay like I did, unfortunately! 
