-
jamesacorrea
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:35 am
- GMAT Score:710
Prompt:
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires.
Response:
In a magazine article on trends and lifestyles an author makes the claim that people today are not as concerned about regulating their consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses as people in the past were. The author points to anecdotal evidence to support his claim, specifically that certain shops and restaurants sell beef and cheeses. However, the author draws an invalid conclusion concerning people's concerns in that his argument relies on assumptions that do not directly prove correlation between a lack of concern and increased consumption of meats and cheeses. In order to strengthen the argument, the author must conduct more research and gather more data on the topic.
In making his conclusion the author relies on the assumption that the fact that Walk into the Heart's Delight happens to sell cheese with high butterfat content in addition to organic fruits and vegetables to be proof that people prefer fatty cheeses more today than they used to. Yet, this mode of reasoning is flawed as the mere presence of fatty cheeses next to healthy foods does not indicate people are not concerned with their consumption of unhealthy foods. Rather, the fact that people shop for fatty cheeses in a store primarily dedicated to healthy foods suggests that people are indeed concerned with the healthiness of their food and are more likely to limit red meat and fatty cheeses. If the author was able to show conclusively that the store sells more cheese now than it used to, and likewise, people consume more unhealthy cheese now than they used to, his argument would be strengthened.
Further, the author argues that the success of the House of Beef across the street from the Good Earth Cafe is additional evidence that people have stopped caring about their beef intake. His assumption is that the success of a restaurant related to red meat over a vegetarian restaurant proves people are less concerned now with red meat than they used to be. But in fact, the opposite may be true as there is no evidence that the House of Beef is successful because it serves more meat. It is possible that the House of Beef is popular due to delicious salads or that the vegetarian cafe is unsuccessful due to poor quality. The author should provide more evidence that the meat restaurant is successful because of increased meat consumption to bolster his argument.
Lastly, the author relies on the overall assumption that people care less about their meat and cheese intake than in the past pointing to anecdotal evidence for support. His assumptions however are vague and don't prove adequate correlation between a decrease in concern and more options for fatty cheeses and meats at stores and restaurants. Specifically, the author overlooks other mechanisms by which people could purchase their food that would show a reverse correlation. Supermarkets, a far wider example than vegetarian stores or restaurants, might show contrasting data that people purchase more healthy fruits and vegetables than they used to. Additionally, people may be more aware today of the risks of consuming too much red meat and fatty cheeses than they were in the past. The truth is the author does not address these possibilities. If he did address them, he might be able to support his conclusion better.
In conclusion, the author's stated opinion that people are not as worried about regulating their intake of red meats and cheeses cannot be proven based on the evidence provided. His argument relies on anecdotal evidence that is based on false assumptions. In particular, the author does not adequately prove correlation between an increase in beef or cheese options with a lack of concern on the part of the general population. Therefor, the author should conduct more research and data collection in order to better address this subject.
The following appeared in a magazine article on trends and lifestyles.
In general, people are not as concerned as they were a decade ago about regulating their intake of red meat and fatty cheeses. Walk into the Heart's Delight, a store that started selling organic fruits and vegetables and whole-grain flours in the 1960's, and you will also find a wide selection of cheeses made with high butterfat content. Next door, the owners of the Good Earth Cafe, an old vegetarian restaurant, are still making a modest living, but the owners of the new House of Beef across the street are millionaires.
Response:
In a magazine article on trends and lifestyles an author makes the claim that people today are not as concerned about regulating their consumption of red meat and fatty cheeses as people in the past were. The author points to anecdotal evidence to support his claim, specifically that certain shops and restaurants sell beef and cheeses. However, the author draws an invalid conclusion concerning people's concerns in that his argument relies on assumptions that do not directly prove correlation between a lack of concern and increased consumption of meats and cheeses. In order to strengthen the argument, the author must conduct more research and gather more data on the topic.
In making his conclusion the author relies on the assumption that the fact that Walk into the Heart's Delight happens to sell cheese with high butterfat content in addition to organic fruits and vegetables to be proof that people prefer fatty cheeses more today than they used to. Yet, this mode of reasoning is flawed as the mere presence of fatty cheeses next to healthy foods does not indicate people are not concerned with their consumption of unhealthy foods. Rather, the fact that people shop for fatty cheeses in a store primarily dedicated to healthy foods suggests that people are indeed concerned with the healthiness of their food and are more likely to limit red meat and fatty cheeses. If the author was able to show conclusively that the store sells more cheese now than it used to, and likewise, people consume more unhealthy cheese now than they used to, his argument would be strengthened.
Further, the author argues that the success of the House of Beef across the street from the Good Earth Cafe is additional evidence that people have stopped caring about their beef intake. His assumption is that the success of a restaurant related to red meat over a vegetarian restaurant proves people are less concerned now with red meat than they used to be. But in fact, the opposite may be true as there is no evidence that the House of Beef is successful because it serves more meat. It is possible that the House of Beef is popular due to delicious salads or that the vegetarian cafe is unsuccessful due to poor quality. The author should provide more evidence that the meat restaurant is successful because of increased meat consumption to bolster his argument.
Lastly, the author relies on the overall assumption that people care less about their meat and cheese intake than in the past pointing to anecdotal evidence for support. His assumptions however are vague and don't prove adequate correlation between a decrease in concern and more options for fatty cheeses and meats at stores and restaurants. Specifically, the author overlooks other mechanisms by which people could purchase their food that would show a reverse correlation. Supermarkets, a far wider example than vegetarian stores or restaurants, might show contrasting data that people purchase more healthy fruits and vegetables than they used to. Additionally, people may be more aware today of the risks of consuming too much red meat and fatty cheeses than they were in the past. The truth is the author does not address these possibilities. If he did address them, he might be able to support his conclusion better.
In conclusion, the author's stated opinion that people are not as worried about regulating their intake of red meats and cheeses cannot be proven based on the evidence provided. His argument relies on anecdotal evidence that is based on false assumptions. In particular, the author does not adequately prove correlation between an increase in beef or cheese options with a lack of concern on the part of the general population. Therefor, the author should conduct more research and data collection in order to better address this subject.
