GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文六五

会计考友

25.        The author concludes that City L has good schools, affordable housing, friendly
& [8 f4 E1 F$ m3 B5 R2 J& Fpeople, flourishing arts and a safe environment. To support this claim the author cites an
$ e" L- i: F& G6 G$ P0 u6 Kannual survey that ranks cities according to quality of life. Two years ago City L was
listed 14th in this survey. As it stands this argument is unconvincing.
      First, the author fails to indicate what individual characteristics of cities were used
1 K0 {, L1 ~: i5 n/ ?; U) B+ S$ aas criteria for the ranking. To the extent that the criteria used in the survey were the
. d& n6 M6 Y1 Ssame as the features listed by the author in the conclusion, the conclusion would b
2 C$ c# X. M! w: Jwarranted. On the other hand, if the survey employed entirely different criteria—for
example, outdoor recreational opportunities or educational achievement levels of adult
residents—then the author's conclusion would be wholly unwarranted.
9 m6 W5 K" u8 c* n% K3 @% j" G      Secondly, the author provides no indication of how each characteristic was
weighted in the ranking. For example, City L may have far and away the most
6 A! V( I9 D+ C, }, Gflourishing arts scene among the cities surveyed, but it may have poor schools,
unfriendly people, and an unsafe environment. The extent to which the survey
+ C: X1 S& @4 l, m8 A# Eaccurately reflects City L's overall quality of life in this case would depend largely on
the relative weight placed on the arts as a factor affecting quality of life.
( H* i7 p; P% h% ~1 C* D2 y6 o      Thirdly, the author fails to indicate how many cities were included in the survey.
Th more cities included in the survey, the stronger the argument—and vice versa. For
example, if 2,000 cities were surveyed, then City L would rank in the top one percent in
terms of quality of life. On the other hand, if only 14 cities were surveyed then City L
' l5 G5 c0 {. ~) B7 Hwould rank last.
      Finally, the author's conclusion depends on the questionable assumption that the
1 N* R( ?7 q( m; _$ O  p: w4 K! c& Dconditions listed by the author have remained unchanged in City L since the survey was
5 u' l* r' \; _0 d- B3 Z- o$ k2 C" kconducted two years ago. Admittedly, had ten years elapsed the argument would be
even weaker. Yet two years is sufficient time for a significant change in the overall
* u" ?4 f! }' S/ {economy, the city's fiscal policies, its financial condition, or its political climate. Any of
these factors can affect the quality of schools, the extent to which art is flourishing, or
/ C" X0 y1 M3 U$ M9 Gthe cost of housing.
4 R( z9 Q4 `+ J& s: [6 z      In conclusion, the author does not adequately support the conclusion. To
5 m  ^# M: V# P8 w) g$ m( f0 x2 ]strengthen the argument, the author must show that the criteria used in the survey were
the same as the features listed in the conclusion and were weighted in a way that does
not distort the picture in City L. To better assess the argument, we would also need more
information about the cities included in the survey, as well as what changes in City L
: w4 y. |, u( F  d3 e5 j" Khave occurred during the past two years.