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.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
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. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
30 Jan 2022, 10:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
Topic: 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 1960s, 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 . . . etc.
ANSWER:
The argument claims that there is less concern regarding the dietary intake of red meat and fatty cheeses compared to a decade ago by arguing that a certain specialty store started selling high butterfat cheeses and a specialty restaurant focused on beef meat has owners which are more wealthy than the owners of vegetarian restaurants. Stated in this way the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
Firstly, the argument readily assumes that being a wealthy owner of a restaurant implies that the sales made at that restaurant are high. This statement is a stretch. To illustrate, the House of Beef restaurant is new and it could have been built only a year ago. Therefore, the owners could have made their fortune from other sources. For example, it could be a possibility that the restaurant does not have many clients and is not a source of their wealth. Consequently, the argument could have been clearer if the source of wealth of those owners was presented.
Secondly, the argument claims that as the Heart’s Delight store increased their offering of high butterfat cheeses in the last 40 years, people have been buying more of those products in the last decade. However, this is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate that there wasn’t a decrease in the amount of high butterfat cheeses sold in the last 10 years. To illustrate, it could be possible that the selection of those cheeses increased from 1960s to up until 10 years ago and then decreased in number over the past decade. Therefore, as the argument does not provide any information about the store’s offering 10 years ago, this assumption is flawed.
Finally, there are several other factors that could be influence the validity of the argument. For example, the percentage split between high butterfat cheeses sales and organic fruits and vegetables sales is not disclosed. It could very well be that only a small percentage of sales are derived from the cheese selection. Furthermore, other data on established businesses that sell products that contain red meat and high fat cheese and their sales is not provided in order to further infer the customer preference towards red meat. Without an answer to those questions, one cannot accurately say if the claim argued is valid or not.
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 related to restaurant and store sales today and 10 years ago as well as information of other establishments were red meat or high fat cheese are sold. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
“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 1960s, 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 . . . etc.
ANSWER:
The argument claims that there is less concern regarding the dietary intake of red meat and fatty cheeses compared to a decade ago by arguing that a certain specialty store started selling high butterfat cheeses and a specialty restaurant focused on beef meat has owners which are more wealthy than the owners of vegetarian restaurants. Stated in this way the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
Firstly, the argument readily assumes that being a wealthy owner of a restaurant implies that the sales made at that restaurant are high. This statement is a stretch. To illustrate, the House of Beef restaurant is new and it could have been built only a year ago. Therefore, the owners could have made their fortune from other sources. For example, it could be a possibility that the restaurant does not have many clients and is not a source of their wealth. Consequently, the argument could have been clearer if the source of wealth of those owners was presented.
Secondly, the argument claims that as the Heart’s Delight store increased their offering of high butterfat cheeses in the last 40 years, people have been buying more of those products in the last decade. However, this is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate that there wasn’t a decrease in the amount of high butterfat cheeses sold in the last 10 years. To illustrate, it could be possible that the selection of those cheeses increased from 1960s to up until 10 years ago and then decreased in number over the past decade. Therefore, as the argument does not provide any information about the store’s offering 10 years ago, this assumption is flawed.
Finally, there are several other factors that could be influence the validity of the argument. For example, the percentage split between high butterfat cheeses sales and organic fruits and vegetables sales is not disclosed. It could very well be that only a small percentage of sales are derived from the cheese selection. Furthermore, other data on established businesses that sell products that contain red meat and high fat cheese and their sales is not provided in order to further infer the customer preference towards red meat. Without an answer to those questions, one cannot accurately say if the claim argued is valid or not.
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 related to restaurant and store sales today and 10 years ago as well as information of other establishments were red meat or high fat cheese are sold. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
31 Jan 2022, 08:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
Welcome to GMAT Club!
AWA Score: 6 out of 6!
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 4.5/5
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!
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 4.5/5
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!
For any of your upcoming posts you are supposed to follow the AWA forum rules; click on the link below to read the rules.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
Good Luck
danarthurcoseru
Moderators:
188 posts
