GMAT Essays (AWA)

Analysis of Argument
Mayor Switzer has been the mayor of Auburn for the last year and a half. In the last year, crime rates have gone up, unemployment has increased and many businesses have moved out of town. Voting mayor Switzer out will help solve Switzer’s crime problem, will help create jobs and will prevent businesses from having to move. How would you rate the accuracy of the above statement? Support your position with reasons and examples.


Mayor Switzer has been the mayor of Auburn for the last year and a half. In the last year, crime rates have gone up, unemployment has increased and many businesses have moved out of town. Voting mayor Switzer out will help solve Switzer’s crime problem, will help create jobs and will prevent businesses from having to move. How would you rate the accuracy of the above statement? Support your position with reasons and examples.

In the preceding statement the author concludes that mayor Switzer is responsible for the difficulties Auburn is experiencing and voting the mayour out will help solve the problems. Even though this claim may well have merit, based on the unsubstantiated premise that unemploment and crime levels have gone up because of the ! mayor and the questionable assumption that voting him out will solve the issues at hand, one cannot accept the argument as valid.

The primary issue with the author`s line of reasoning lies in the unsubstantiated premise that the mayor is the reason for the crime problem and increased unemployment. There is no evidentiary support that those problems are caused directly by the mayor and the decisions he has made. It is possible that unemployment have been going up prior to the mayor`s elections because of a recession or some city specific problem - for example a big company ( the largest employer in the area ) decided to move its producing facilities to China to reduce the costs. Because of that, many small businesses that were directly linked with it were forced to move out of town as well. The high crime levels might be because of a reluctance by the residences of the town to pass a new strict law that would help address the issue.

Secondary, there is ! no proof in the argument that mayor Switzer is unqualified or ! biased a nd that electing a new mayor will directly solve the difficulties the town is experiencing. The situation could indeed call for some changes, but there is no guarantee that the new mayor will handle the matter in a better manner. On the contrary, the crime and unemployment problem could continue to worsen.

In addition, even though the argument is seriously flawed, the conclusion can still be correct. If the author provides eventiary support that the situation in the town is directly linked to the mayor and the bad decision he has made, then it is likely that changing mayor Switzer and electing a new one would reduce unemployment and crime rates. For example, if public services are being handled in a poorly manner because of the people running them , who are close to the mayor, we can conclude that is one of the reasons for people to have moved out of town. Unpopular decisions such as increasing local taxes are another possibility.

In sum, the author`s llogical argument is based on questionable assumptions and unsubstantiated premises that render his conclusion invalid. If the writer truly hopes to change the reader`s mind on the issue , he will have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic and give evidentiary support for his thesis. Otherwise, the argument will likely convince few people.


I`d appreciate it if I made some typos or other mistakes and you point them out.

Yours,
George