a我考网

 找回密码
 立即注册

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

扫一扫,访问微社区

查看: 106|回复: 0

[考试辅导] GMAT考试:Argument写作范文三十

[复制链接]
发表于 2012-8-15 21:50:16 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
59.        ; {! B7 W! \! M3 X* |  g( L
  The author contends that it makes good sense to reduce funding for mining regulation, because regulatory problems with over-mining and pollution will be solved when scientists learn how to create large amounts of copper from other chemical elements. One reason the author gives for this conclusion is that the problem of over-mining will be quickly eliminated when the amount of potentially available copper is no longer limited by the quantity of actual copper deposits. Another reason given is that pollution problems created by production of synthetic copper substitutes will be eliminated when manufacturers no longer depend on substitutes. This argument is weak because the conclusion goes beyond the scope of the premises and because the argument relies on questionable assumptions.
$ ?$ x% C! C/ w3 V3 {& g来源:考试大
! o4 y9 p) q! [* {: L      To begin with, the wording of the conclusion suggests that funding for mining regulation generally should be reduced, yet the premises are about copper mining only. There are many mined resources other than copper; advances in copper synthesis technology will in all likelihood have no bearing on whether regulation of other kinds of mining should be changed.' B0 H7 e" Z! v
9 p! _$ j( {" s7 x4 `* O
        Furthermore, the argument depends on the assumption that copper mining will slow down once copper can be chemically synthesized. However, the author provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. Moreover, it is entirely possible that copper mining will remain less expensive than copper synthesis. If so, there will be no incentives, outside of regulatory ones, to slow down copper mining. In a word, the problem of over-mining will remain.; w8 c8 m$ M4 v2 |0 u
来源:考试大
4 \1 h! b6 Z4 ]. a      Finally, the argument relies on the assumption that synthesizing copper will not create the same kind of pollution problems as those resulting from the synthesis of copper substitutes. However, the author provides no evidence to substantiate this assumption. Without such evidence, we cannot accept the premise that pollution problems will be eliminated by switching from producing copper substitutes to producing copper itself.in conclusion, I am not convinced on the basis of this argument that the time has come to cut funding for the regulation of mining in general, or even for the regulation of copper mining in particular. To strengthen the argument, the author must restrict the scope of the conclusion to copper mining rather than to mining in general. The author must also provide support for the two assumptions underlying the argument.
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|Woexam.Com ( 湘ICP备18023104号 )

GMT+8, 2024-4-29 13:09 , Processed in 0.139724 second(s), 21 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4 Licensed

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表