Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Hi all, just started AWA today. Put it off for the last day as I figured it's the most relaxing of the lot of to-do's. Anyhow, my GMAT is tmrw at noon so any input would be greatly appreciated.
"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 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 Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires."
The argument here is that people, in general, are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Based on the evidence provided by the author, the argument is not well supported. The following paragraphs will explain why the support is weak and how the arguments could be improved.
A main weakness of the argument is that the evidence is absed on a general, visual observation. Let's take a look at the statement regarding Heart's Delight. The author claims that because the store started selling organic fruits and vegetables in the 1960's and have more recently offered high butterfat cheese, people are not as concerned with their intake of fatty cheese. The simple fac tthat cheese is available at the store is the basis for the author's claim. However, it is still possible to eat fatty chese in moderation and still be concerned with the amount of intake. For example, a customer may purchase a block of cheese to serve at a party. This does not mean that he/she is not concerned with the amount of the fatty product he/hse will consume. The argument would be strengthened if there was evidence that people eat an unhealthy amount of fatty cheese on an individual basis. This could done by providing statistics from a governing health organization.
The argument fails in that is makes a huge assumption, again, based on visual observation. The evidence states that the Good Earth Cafe owners make a modest living while the House of Beef owners are millionaires. First of all, there is no evidence of this fact. It is almost impossible to assess a business owner's net worth based on appearances. Also, the author assumes that the financial success of a food establishment is solely based on the popularity of the product it serves. This is clearly not the case. It is common knowledge that a successful restaurant requires proper management inorder to be successful. The evidence, again, would benefit from proof that the House of Beef owner's are millionaires and the Good Earth Cafe owners are not.
In conclusion, the evidence in support of the argument is wek. There is little to substantiate the claims made by the author with his/her evidence based on visual observations. As well, there were assumptions made that greatly weak the credibility of the arguments.
It's 1 am here in Toronto, I'm writing today at noon, so I'm off to bed. Thanks for the reply.
Any comments ? I'll be checking in the morning before I head out to the test centre. Admittedly, this is the first essay I wrote after just reading other people's on here and the AWA guide. Thanks guys/gals.
Cool ! I am just in time. Well the first essay is the crux of the awa. I think you are pretty good in nailing those. If you have written this in 30 mins - I am sure you will get a perfect score on the awa. Just keep this that way ! All the best !
Hey one this you can improve in the first para - why not say it aloud - the author's reasoning suffers from two critical errors or four critical errors. That way the reader knows how many flaws you are going to evaluate. All the best !
Please rate my essay! I know I am making typing mistakes:(
The write has made a claim that people are not concerned about their intake of read meat and fatty cheese. Firstly, this claim is not supported by any evidence. Secondly the evidence provided for his claim is either incomplete or misses many critical aspects.
The writer has made a claim that people are not concerned about their intake of read meat and fatty cheese as they were a decade ago. Firstly the writer needs to establish that what is he referring to when he talks about "people". Is he referring to the inhabitants of a certain city e.g. London, or some country etc.? Secondly to support this claim the writer first needs to show what was the consumption per person of read meat a decade ago and what is it now. Without making such a comparison the writer's claim is not establlished. Secondly he can do a survey of people and ask their opinion of what they think about the healthy food options (organic fruits, vegetable etc.) vs read meat and fatty cheese. This will also give him an idea about whether people are actually concerned as well, irrespective of their consumption. Because people can be genuinely concerned but might still be consuming read meat and fatty cheese because of factors like availability, price etc. If there are few shops that provide organic fruit and it is expensive as well as compared to red meat, although unlikely, will make people prefer read meat and fatty cheese over organic fruit and vegetables
Secondly the writer supports him claim by giving two examples. One is of Heart's Delight. A store that originally started selling organic fruits and vegetables but then also offered cheese. Firstly the writer cannot conclude any thing on people's preference based on one or few shops. He has to take a large sample to justify his claim. For example if he is talking about a city that has a 100,00 shops divided into 100 localities, he needs to take atleast one large shop per locality to have a representative sample size. Secondly He needs to consider what is the revenue of this shop that is coming from organic fruits and vegetables and what is coming from cheese. This will give an idea about people's preference who visit this particular shop. Secondly the writer needs to look at other variables that might have led to this shop offering cheese. For example, they might have found a low cost supplier of cheese. So without considering all these factors that writer cannot support his claim
The second example he gives if of two shops, Good Earth Cafe and House beef. He claims that Good Earth Cafe is making a modest living and House Beef has become millionaires which proves that people are not concerned about their intake of red meat and fatty cheese. Here again the writer is relying on faulty assumptions and missing important points which are necessary to establish this claim. Firstly this Cafe is located next door to another shop, Heart's Delight that is selling the similar products (organic fruits, vegetables etc.). It might be the case that people are buying from Heart's Delight and Heart's Delight is making a lot of money from it's organic food section: Much more then the Beef shop. Secondly there might be many shops in that locaility that are selling organic food and this Beef Shop might be the only one in the locality. So as stated above, the writer needs to take a larger sample size to establish high arguments. Thirdly their could be other reasons for poor sale of the Good Earth Cafe like poor food quality etc.
To make a robust and sound argument the writer needs to do two things. Firstly he needs to establish his argument. This will invovle defining what is he referring to as "people". Gathering data and interviewing people to establish people are not concerned and comparing this to data and opinion a decade ago. Secondly he needs to increase the sample size of the stores and look at other reasons why certain stores might not be performing well. Only then he can make this claim
The arugment claims that people are not as concerned about their intake of read meat and fatty cheeses as they are a decade ago. Stating that author provides his two observations - Fatty cheeses in Heart's Global and financial status of Owners of Old cafe and House of Beefs. The argument fails to consider several key factors and came to a hasty conclusion with just a couple of observations.
First, the author observes introduction of fatty cheeses in Heart's Delight and concludes people are not concerned about intake of fatty cheeses. However, there is no correlative data provided to conclude that fatty cheeses consumption increased significantly at individual level from a decade ago. It may happen that people are consuming in very minimal quantities. If the author adds any data that strengthens the conclusion that existence of fatty cheese indeed resulted in high consumption it definitely helps.
Second, the author compares Old cafe vegetarian shop and house of beef interms of financial position of their owners. The comparison is not sound.For example,House of Beef owners may be millionaires in the past as well. It can so happen, Old cafe owners may be donating considerable amount of his earnings to charity. One need to compare the amount of quantity being sold. Even then comparing just two shops does not provide a good representative sample. At the same time, one need to know the density of organic and vegetable shops with respect to red meat shops. If only one read meat shop is available in the neighbourhood then its sales will be high compared to high density organic and vegetable shops.
Finally, the argument has to be backed by a fact finding study and then author can strengthen the argument with his observations considering a good representative sample size.
In summary, the observations can lead to multiple theories. Without backed by any substantiative data the argument is weak and unconvincing. It has no legs to stand and conclusion is high questionable with the premises mentioned in the argument.
Re: Rate my essay - GMAT TMRW!
29 Dec 2014, 07:17