Please find the question stem, and my essay completed in 30 min below. The question stem is from the Official Guide AWA Sample Topics.
QUESTION:
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a popular science and technology magazine:
"It is a popular myth that consumers are really benefitting from advances in agricultural technology. Granted, consumers are, on the average, spending a decreasing proportion of their income on food. But consider that the demand for food does not rise in proportion with real income. As real income rises, therefore, consumers can be expected to spend a decreasing proportion of their income on food. Yet agricultural technology is credited with having made our lives better."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
ESSAY RESPONSE:
The author argues that agricultural technology is inaccurately given credit for improving the lives of consumers. This essay will show that while the author's conclusion may be accurate, the line of reasoning employed relies on a specific interpretation of the data cited, when there are a myriad other plausible explanations for the same data.
First, the author argues that a lower proportion of income spent on food indicates an expected pattern of rising real income and wealth. While this may be true, this use of statistics can be deceiving. For example, if a section of consumers were to fall deadly ill, the proportion they spend on food might also decline as they increase medical expenses and forgo spending on food. Additionally, consumers might be experiencing lower overall incomes, accompanied by lower proportions of income spent on food, so this statistic need not indicate that consumers are better off.
Second, the author assumes that lower prices indicate that the consumer is more well off. This need not necessarily be the case, as lower prices may also correspond with lower quality of food. If the author could provide evidence that the nutritional value or overall quality of food is maintained or increased while the proportion of income spent on food decreases, the author's argument would be strengthened.
Third, the author presents evidence that consumers are, on the average, spending less of their income on food as compared to past amounts. This average does not indicate the range or the distribution of that average among the citizenry. For example, a certain subsection of the population might have experienced rising spending on food, while another group had experienced decreasing spending on food. If the author had provided some additional information about the distribution of that spending, his or her argument would be more strongly supported.
Last, but not least, the author mentions income in the second sentence, but changes to "real income" in the third sentence. This small shift could also make a difference in the validity of his argument. For example, if the inflation of food prices was greater than that of non-food goods, the author's argument be better supported accurate if the statistics were modified to take this into account.
While the author provides statistics to support his argument, his or her use of statistics is suspect and exhibits several common characteristics of deception using percentages. Had the author provided additional context or raw numbers to his fact set, his argument would be greatly improved.
QUESTION:
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a popular science and technology magazine:
"It is a popular myth that consumers are really benefitting from advances in agricultural technology. Granted, consumers are, on the average, spending a decreasing proportion of their income on food. But consider that the demand for food does not rise in proportion with real income. As real income rises, therefore, consumers can be expected to spend a decreasing proportion of their income on food. Yet agricultural technology is credited with having made our lives better."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
ESSAY RESPONSE:
The author argues that agricultural technology is inaccurately given credit for improving the lives of consumers. This essay will show that while the author's conclusion may be accurate, the line of reasoning employed relies on a specific interpretation of the data cited, when there are a myriad other plausible explanations for the same data.
First, the author argues that a lower proportion of income spent on food indicates an expected pattern of rising real income and wealth. While this may be true, this use of statistics can be deceiving. For example, if a section of consumers were to fall deadly ill, the proportion they spend on food might also decline as they increase medical expenses and forgo spending on food. Additionally, consumers might be experiencing lower overall incomes, accompanied by lower proportions of income spent on food, so this statistic need not indicate that consumers are better off.
Second, the author assumes that lower prices indicate that the consumer is more well off. This need not necessarily be the case, as lower prices may also correspond with lower quality of food. If the author could provide evidence that the nutritional value or overall quality of food is maintained or increased while the proportion of income spent on food decreases, the author's argument would be strengthened.
Third, the author presents evidence that consumers are, on the average, spending less of their income on food as compared to past amounts. This average does not indicate the range or the distribution of that average among the citizenry. For example, a certain subsection of the population might have experienced rising spending on food, while another group had experienced decreasing spending on food. If the author had provided some additional information about the distribution of that spending, his or her argument would be more strongly supported.
Last, but not least, the author mentions income in the second sentence, but changes to "real income" in the third sentence. This small shift could also make a difference in the validity of his argument. For example, if the inflation of food prices was greater than that of non-food goods, the author's argument be better supported accurate if the statistics were modified to take this into account.
While the author provides statistics to support his argument, his or her use of statistics is suspect and exhibits several common characteristics of deception using percentages. Had the author provided additional context or raw numbers to his fact set, his argument would be greatly improved.
