GMAT Essays (AWA)

Essay Question:
The following appeared in a science magazine:

"The "Space Race" of the 1960's between the USA and Russia was very expensive but it yielded a tremendous number of technological advances. These advances have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits. The benefits have more than paid for the effort and money spent during the Space Race and therefore the government should make allowances within the budget to pay for a manned Mars landing by 2020."

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.

My Response:

The author states that the "Space Race" of 1960's between the USA and Russia was although expensive but resulted in huge number of technological advances. The author further goes on stating that these technologies have provided many economic and humanitarian benefits and have overcome the investment and efforts involved in Space Race. Hence author conclude that government should finance manned Mars landing by 2020. This argument is flawed as the author fails to provide evidences and statistical data in support of his argument.

Firstly, author mentions that the war was expensive but brought technological advances. He fails to give the amount or budget invested in the war. Also there is no mention of type of technological advances. Additionally there are no evidences provided in support to whether these technological advances are actually needed by USA or it's just something additional and people can live without them.

Secondly author says that yielded technological advances have provided economic and humanitarian benefits. The author fails to include examples of technology which actually benefited humanity. Also there is no statistical data provided to compare the existing situation, such as cost involved, manpower, job opportunities etc and changes after accepting technological advances. Are these benefits only for humans and economic growth? What about the other aspects such as animals, natural resources and environment? Author fails to simply the long terms and short terms benefit of these technological advances.

Thirdly author says that the cost and efforts invested in the space race are paid off in the form of technological advances but fails to provide substantiate data in support of his request to government for allocating the budget. For the government to allocate the budget for funding the mars landing by 2020 few points are need to be considered which are missing in author's argument. How the government will be benefited if they allocate money for the project? Will the landing of Mars by 2020 will yield same results as provided by Space Wars? What percentage of financial help is required by government? Will the funding will increase the burden on government financials.?

In conclusion the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reason and is unconvincing. The argument can be considerably strengthen if the author clearly provide the evidences and statistical data along with answers to mentioned questions. In the absence of substantiate data the arguments stands unsubstantiated and open to debate.