5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Argument essay template, if anyone wants it
-
rjank
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:04 pm
- Location: San Antonio, TX
- Thanked: 4 times
- GMAT Score:650
I don't think it would be held against you (I'm not certain, though). As far as I know it's technically correct when you don't know the gender of the author to default to he. Stylistically I think it's a bit old-fashioned (but this is really just my preference). I prefer to use "the author" if the prompt metions an article or opinion piece that was written. Or "the mayor" or whatever if it gives you the title of someone making an argument.anujmalik wrote:Just a quick question- Is it fine to refer the author as he?
-
shubhamsharma98
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 11:32 am
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:700
-
[email protected]
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:08 pm
-
gabi_schneider
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:49 am
Hello everybody,
thanks a lot for this great template! I have my test in 2 weeks and I am pretty nervous.
I just wonder, can those, who used that template, tell me, if they used all the general sentences? I wrote two essays with the template and I just made up two or three sentences in each paragraph directly related to the argument. Is that enough? I am afraid, that my essays are too general...
Thanks a lot in advance for your help!
thanks a lot for this great template! I have my test in 2 weeks and I am pretty nervous.
I just wonder, can those, who used that template, tell me, if they used all the general sentences? I wrote two essays with the template and I just made up two or three sentences in each paragraph directly related to the argument. Is that enough? I am afraid, that my essays are too general...
Thanks a lot in advance for your help!
so again i would like to thank you for making my life so much easier-
ketaki6
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 6:01 pm
- Followed by:9 members
Hi, I am taking the GMAT tomorrow. Can someone please evaluate this argument essay of mine? Expert advice really appreciated.
"Americans spend far too much of their time buying and consuming non-essential goods. Studies show that, on average Americans spend over a quarter of their leisure time shopping. As such, it is no secret why America is losing its competitive edge relative to other countries. Instead of spending their time productively, Americans are wasting time through frivolous consumption. In order to counteract this trend, Americans should spend more time focused on personal and communal development--by, for example, pursuing educational advancement or participating in volunteer opportunities."
In the preceding statement, the write says that Americans are spending way too much time unnecessary shopping, and aren't involving themselves in personal or communal development He goes on to conclude that this is the reason America is losing its competitive edge to other countries. Though his claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on questionable premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in the unsubstantiated premises. He states that Americans spend too much of their time buying and consuming non-essential goods. He goes ahead and provides evidence for the same - Studies show than on an average Americans spend over a quarter of their leisure time shopping. The studies mentioned here have shown that Americans spend a substantial time shopping, however how has the author assumed that it involves buying non essential goods? Primarily, how does the author define non-essential goods? A model's profession requires her to look good - for her buying a fancy dress might not be non-essential at all. A sportsperson needs the best shoes he can get - for him spending a lavish amount on sneakers is a necessity. An investment banker who just lost his job at Merill Lynch because of the recession, might indulge in an exorbitantly priced piece of cake to keep him going for the rest of the day. The author even goes on to term the shopping as 'frivolous consumption'. I think that is taking it too far. Studies sure can provide us with statistics over what is black and white, however how can a study decide what is grey - what is frivolous, what is non-essential? The author has extrapolated the study's findings to establish a premise which solely depends on his own interpretation. The author might think that if a quarter of peoples' time is being spent shopping it must be frivolous and non-essential, since how can it take so much time to buy basic essential things? That again could vary so much with different people. My mother spends two hours every other day grocery shopping for the family. She likes to explore new brands, new foods and reads the nutrition content very carefully at the back of all processed foods. Our domestic help on the other hand, spends exactly half an hour buying the groceries for our household because she goes with a list made by my mother, which she needs to strictly adhere to. Here are two people buying similar essential things but spending different amounts of time on it. If people like my mother, were a major part of the study, then it definitely would have raised the time each person took shopping, but does not necessarily imply that it is frivolous or unnecessary. The author's premises, the basis for argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion inacceptable.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. He assumes that there America is losing its competitive edge to other countries because people are spending too much time shopping. It seems like the assumption has gone a bit overboard by relating something as big as a country losing its competitive edge to people shopping. America could be losing its competitive edge due to so many reasons. It could be the recession from which America has still not recovered, it could be that the eastern countries are pacing their progress by using their infinite manpower, it could also be that America is losing faithful allies which is harming its imports and exports. The article also concludes that in order to counteract this trend, Americans should spend more time focused on personal and communal development--by, for example, pursuing educational advancement or participating in volunteer opportunities. The author has mentioned no basis on which he has reached this conclusion. He has made an assumption that efforts on a common man's behalf to spend his time more fruitfully will counteract this trend. It might be so that even if educational advancement and volunteering activities are taken up, America's progress won't be greatly affected. It could be that these activities might take so long to show a noticeable impact that the dynamics of different countries and the progress charts might have completely changed by then. Moreover, if in the first place the correlation between America's progress and how people spend their time is wrong, these activities would have little or no impact at all. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links he assumes exist.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The author could provide statistics for the amount a family spends on basic essential consumer goods as opposed to fancy consumer goods one can do without. Results of a study could also be presented showing how much an average American family spends above its income level. If we knew about whether the families surveyed were also spending time in volunteer and educational advancement activities, we would have been able to say that although a considerable time is spent shopping, a considerable amount of time is also spent (or not spent, depending on the study) in activities focused on personal and communal development. Though there are several issues with the research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. It cannot be said without more evidence and support that America's progress is related to how fruitfully its people spend their time. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his arguments and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.
"Americans spend far too much of their time buying and consuming non-essential goods. Studies show that, on average Americans spend over a quarter of their leisure time shopping. As such, it is no secret why America is losing its competitive edge relative to other countries. Instead of spending their time productively, Americans are wasting time through frivolous consumption. In order to counteract this trend, Americans should spend more time focused on personal and communal development--by, for example, pursuing educational advancement or participating in volunteer opportunities."
In the preceding statement, the write says that Americans are spending way too much time unnecessary shopping, and aren't involving themselves in personal or communal development He goes on to conclude that this is the reason America is losing its competitive edge to other countries. Though his claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on questionable premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's reasoning lies in the unsubstantiated premises. He states that Americans spend too much of their time buying and consuming non-essential goods. He goes ahead and provides evidence for the same - Studies show than on an average Americans spend over a quarter of their leisure time shopping. The studies mentioned here have shown that Americans spend a substantial time shopping, however how has the author assumed that it involves buying non essential goods? Primarily, how does the author define non-essential goods? A model's profession requires her to look good - for her buying a fancy dress might not be non-essential at all. A sportsperson needs the best shoes he can get - for him spending a lavish amount on sneakers is a necessity. An investment banker who just lost his job at Merill Lynch because of the recession, might indulge in an exorbitantly priced piece of cake to keep him going for the rest of the day. The author even goes on to term the shopping as 'frivolous consumption'. I think that is taking it too far. Studies sure can provide us with statistics over what is black and white, however how can a study decide what is grey - what is frivolous, what is non-essential? The author has extrapolated the study's findings to establish a premise which solely depends on his own interpretation. The author might think that if a quarter of peoples' time is being spent shopping it must be frivolous and non-essential, since how can it take so much time to buy basic essential things? That again could vary so much with different people. My mother spends two hours every other day grocery shopping for the family. She likes to explore new brands, new foods and reads the nutrition content very carefully at the back of all processed foods. Our domestic help on the other hand, spends exactly half an hour buying the groceries for our household because she goes with a list made by my mother, which she needs to strictly adhere to. Here are two people buying similar essential things but spending different amounts of time on it. If people like my mother, were a major part of the study, then it definitely would have raised the time each person took shopping, but does not necessarily imply that it is frivolous or unnecessary. The author's premises, the basis for argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion inacceptable.
In addition, the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. He assumes that there America is losing its competitive edge to other countries because people are spending too much time shopping. It seems like the assumption has gone a bit overboard by relating something as big as a country losing its competitive edge to people shopping. America could be losing its competitive edge due to so many reasons. It could be the recession from which America has still not recovered, it could be that the eastern countries are pacing their progress by using their infinite manpower, it could also be that America is losing faithful allies which is harming its imports and exports. The article also concludes that in order to counteract this trend, Americans should spend more time focused on personal and communal development--by, for example, pursuing educational advancement or participating in volunteer opportunities. The author has mentioned no basis on which he has reached this conclusion. He has made an assumption that efforts on a common man's behalf to spend his time more fruitfully will counteract this trend. It might be so that even if educational advancement and volunteering activities are taken up, America's progress won't be greatly affected. It could be that these activities might take so long to show a noticeable impact that the dynamics of different countries and the progress charts might have completely changed by then. Moreover, if in the first place the correlation between America's progress and how people spend their time is wrong, these activities would have little or no impact at all. The author weakens his argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links he assumes exist.
While the author does have several key issues in his argument's premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The author could provide statistics for the amount a family spends on basic essential consumer goods as opposed to fancy consumer goods one can do without. Results of a study could also be presented showing how much an average American family spends above its income level. If we knew about whether the families surveyed were also spending time in volunteer and educational advancement activities, we would have been able to say that although a considerable time is spent shopping, a considerable amount of time is also spent (or not spent, depending on the study) in activities focused on personal and communal development. Though there are several issues with the research and clarification, he could improve his argument significantly.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. It cannot be said without more evidence and support that America's progress is related to how fruitfully its people spend their time. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his arguments and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.
ketaki6 - First of all Best of luck with your exam tomorrow. Take rest and relax. I believe you have done your homework. Post these questions separately to maintain the content of this post.ketaki6 wrote:This is absolutely great. I have my GMAT tomorrow. Can someone tell me the exact difference between a premise and an assumption. Is assumption just a weaker premise?
Thanks!
Your question -
Premises and Assumptions are building blocks of any argument.
- Both are always TRUE in GMAT language unless explicitly stated
Definition -
- Premise is a stated fact that is present in the argument.
- Assumption is any unstated fact on which the entire line of reasoning of the argument depends.
For an argument to be valid, the conclusion should be inferred correctly based on the given premises.
This will happen only if the assumption and premises are TRUE.
In GMAT, premises are always accepted TRUE. So it helps in understanding the validity of an argument.
But it cannot be FALSE in any scenario.
Assumption is any unstated premise. It can be deducted from the stimulus or can be stated explicitly in the question stem or answer choices. Assumption is always true, but it may or may not support the conclusion when mentioned in the question stem or the answer choices. So, if an assumption is not supporting the conclusion, the argument is WEAKENED by the assumption, whereas if an assumption is supporting the conclusion, the argument is STRENGTHENED by the assumption.
Hope this helps !
-
sdilmanian
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 4:13 pm
-
sidhaartha
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:28 am
- GMAT Score:760
This is an awesome template.
Was lucky enough to stumble upon it a day before my GMAT, ended up using all the openings and sentences given by myohmy before even considering the argument at hand.
Scored a 6
The Issue is more of a personal preference thing,as he says and the general guidelines laid down are pretty useful too
Was lucky enough to stumble upon it a day before my GMAT, ended up using all the openings and sentences given by myohmy before even considering the argument at hand.
Scored a 6
The Issue is more of a personal preference thing,as he says and the general guidelines laid down are pretty useful too
