Welcome! Check out our free B-School Guides to learn how you compare with other applicants.
Login or Register

Argument

This topic has 1 member reply
Suyog GMAT Destroyer! Default Avatar
Joined
17 Aug 2006
Posted:
315 messages
Thanked:
23 times
Argument Post Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:43 pm
Elapsed Time: 00:00
  • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME])
    Can you please rate this argument and provide me with some feedback?
    Thank you for your time. Really appreciate your help.

    "The computerized on-board warning system that will be installed in commercial airlines will virtually solve the problem of midair planes collision. One plane's warning system can receive signals from another's transponder - a radio set that signal a plane's course - in order to determine the likelihood of a collision and recommend evasive action."


    Although this argument maybe logically sound, it fails to provide real context and strong examples in order to substantiate the conclusion that, computerized warning system will solve the problem of the midair collision. It fails to provide information on the effectiveness in the frequency of the transmission signals. It also fails to account for the other factors that may influence the arguments in terms of the design and accuracy of the new system. It also assumes that receiver and transponder will be able to achieve the maximum success rate in terms of transmission and thus will avoid midair collision. However, there are many other factors that contribute to a week conclusion and a flawed argument.

    Most of all, argument tries to portray that, radio signals work effectively to reduce the rate of midair collision. It could be that, due to bad weather there are lots of fluctuations and hence some of the signals are lost or even changed. This could lead to complete disaster. It could also be that the signals transmitted be the transponder and sensed wrongly by the receiver and caused the air plane to take some wrong action. Argument will be strengthened if it provides example and context that explains transmission accuracy of radio system with proper examples.

    In addition, argument fails to clarify what is the existing system that was in place and what are the flaws of the existing system which are overcome by the new system. It should also state the examples and test scenarios of the new system and how efficiently it would avoid the midair collision. If the author mentions the benefits and effectiveness of the new system, it will further reduce the flaws of the argument and will provide the needed support to the argument.

    Furthermore, the argument assumes that the computerized system will work flawlessly without any glitches or power shutdown. First of all the argument should provide the information on the stability of the computer system, secondly, it should mention that the new system will work efficiently without fluctuations and failures and finally if the computer system fails, it should mention what is the fastest backup method available to restore the system. Argument will stand better if it provides the information on the above factors.

    In sum, argument fails to convince that the new system will avoid midair collision. Argument will be strengthened if it provides the information on the transmission of new signal and its accuracy. It will be further strengthened if the argument lists the benefits of the new system and its effectiveness. Additionally proper backup plan with the restoration information will close further flaws of the argument.

    "Security of the airline passenger is an important issue and proper care should be taken in order to avoid any mishap".

    Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums!
    VP_Jim GMAT Instructor Default Avatar
    Joined
    01 May 2008
    Posted:
    1223 messages
    Followed by:
    10 members
    Thanked:
    183 times
    Post Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:38 pm
    This is pretty good overall. There's some minor grammatical issues, but nothing too bad. The biggest problem is that you should spend some more time discussing the errors in reasoning. Your body paragraphs are set up as one sentence saying why the argument is faulty, then a couple regarding how to strengthen the argument. Try to add in another sentence or two discussing why the argument is faulty. This will deepen your analysis.

    I'll give you a 4 to 4.5 - nice work!

    _________________
    Jim S. | GMAT Instructor | Veritas Prep

    Best Conversation Starters

    1 j_shreyans 86 topics
    2 aditya8062 41 topics
    3 RiyaR 30 topics
    4 kamalakarthi 29 topics
    5 anksm22 27 topics
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

    Most Active Experts

    1 image description GMATGuruNY

    The Princeton Review Teacher

    170 posts
    2 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

    GMAT Prep Now Teacher

    151 posts
    3 image description MBAPrepAdvantage

    MBAPrepAdvantage

    94 posts
    4 image description CriticalSquareMBA

    Critical Square

    60 posts
    5 image description Matt@VeritasPrep

    Veritas Prep

    58 posts
    See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts