GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文一

文章作者 100test 发表时间 2007:03:10 10:26:19
来源 100Test.Com百考试题网


59. 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.
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.
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.
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.

相关文章


2005年09月数学机经讨论稿第八篇(239--278)
关于GMAT考试常见的新手提问
GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文二
个人考试心得:GMAT考的不是英语而是机智
GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文一
2005年09月数学机经讨论稿第六篇(154--186)
GMAT网上报名恢复仍有技术问题
2005年09月数学机经讨论稿第五篇(129--153)
07年秋的新GRE考试的17个热点问题
澳大利亚华人论坛
考好网
日本华人论坛
华人移民留学论坛
英国华人论坛