GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文六一

会计考友

29.        This speaker argues that farmers who invested in organic farming equipment
should resume synthetic farming because it is financially unwise to continue organic
& d' W2 q3 p& l; k7 wfarming. The speaker cites studies showing that farmers who switched to organic
/ T# u' T! v/ L& G1 {8 G2 ffarming last year had tower crop yields. Based on these studies, the speaker concludes
& c8 w2 [( h! D( \& ]1 {% N% ethat the relatively inexpensive investment in organic farming equipment cannot justify
continuing to farm organically. The speaker also claims that continuing to farm
organically is financially unwise because it is motivated by environmental, not
& `3 f6 C, b3 ~1 Ceconomic, concerns. The argument suffers from three problems.
) }( a3 n# i) A2 G, m5 v  B8 g4 R      One problem with this reasoning involves the vague comparative claim that
farmers who switched to organic farming fast year had lower crop yields. We are not
5 F+ _% U1 `! O* _5 Z# \/ Rinformed whether the survey compared last year's organic crop yields with yields from
: A8 u1 n. \2 s' [, e( Zprevious years or with those from synthetic farms. Moreover, the author provides no
evidence about how the survey was conducted. Lacking more information about the
6 C2 ?* a  P6 `; `survey, we cannot accept the speaker's conclusion.
      Secondly, the speaker assumes that the low crop yields for first-time organic
; G+ a' E: w4 ufarmers last year are representative of crop yields for organic farmers overall. However,
  I' z0 B! [+ Xmore experienced organic farmers might have had much better crop yields last year.
Also, the first-time organic farmers might improve their own crop yields in future years.
% S* B% A( O0 ^; d0 ?, E, z& M7 sMoreover, last year's yield may have been unusually low due to poor weather or other
factors, and thus not indicative of future yields.
      Finally, in asserting that organic farming is financially unwise because it is
motivated by environmental instead of economic concerns, the speaker unfairly assumes
6 d  L' \! l5 E' e7 h, h5 U0 Jthat a practice cannot be both environmentally and economically beneficial. It is
3 J- C! A4 n( n7 d6 E) i: O2 rpossible that, in the long run, practices that help protect the environment will also result
9 C2 |  V# M" N1 sin greater economic benefits. For instance, organic farming methods may better protect
soil from depletion of the elements that contribute to healthy crops, providing an
economic benefit in the long run.
      In conclusion, the speaker's argument is poorly supported and is short-sighted. To
better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the how the
survey was conducted, especially about the comparison the survey makes. To strengthen
the argument, the speaker must present evidence that last years' crop yields from first-
time organic farmers are representative of yields among organic farms in general. The
" }0 ~) U1 `: ?: H9 B# S" `4 v+ zauthor must also provide evidence that environmentally sound practices cannot be
economically beneficial as well.