Home >>GMAT >>Essays>>Essay - 20
20. The following appeared in an article in a health and
fitness magazine. �Laboratory
studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals
necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents
of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less
frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water
may seem expensive, drinking it
instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health.�
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
Sample essay 1:
The argument that drinking Saluda Natural
Spring Water instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health is not
entirely logically convincing, since it
lacks certain supporting
factors. Firstly,
the argument assumes that Saluda Natural Spring Water is the major reason why
residents of Saluda are less frequently hospitalized
than the national average. However, there
is little evidence that this water is the only difference between this place and
the rest of the country. And the reason
why people in other places are more hospitalized are numerous and varied. There
are so many other factors that would bring
people in other places to hospitals, such as accidents, food contamination,
illnesses, etc.
Secondly, the argument also assumes that the
minerals in Saluda National Spring Water are the key minerals for the good
health of the residents of Saluda.
However, this may not be true. We need not only minerals to keep good heath but
also various vitamins. Besides, our body
needs more minerals than those contained in Saluda Natural Spring Water.
Finally, even if the Saluda water
is the major reason why the
residents of Saluda are less hospitalized, the argument still omits the fact
that there is more than one way to keep drinking
water free from bacteria. For instance, the most common practice is to boil
water up to 100 degree Celsius
and keep it at that degree for more than 5
minutes. Therefore drinking Saluda water to keep good health is not the
only alternative.
Thus, the argument is not completely sound.
The evidence in support of the conclusion that the Saluda residents are less
hospitalized does little to prove the
conclusion that drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water is a wise investment in
good health since it omits the assumptions
I have just raised. The argument might have been strengthened by making it plain
that Saluda Natural Spring Water is the
major reason why the residents of Saluda are less hospitalized, that the water
contains all the major minerals essential for the human
body, and that there is no other way to keep water from bacteria.
Sample essay 2:
In this argument the author concludes that
drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water (SNSW) is preferable to drinking tap
water. Three reasons
are offered in support of this conclusion: SNSW contains several of the minerals
necessary for good health, it is completely tree
of bacteria, and residents of Saluda�the town where it is bottled�are
hospitalized less frequently than the national average. This argument
is unconvincing because it relies on a variety of dubious
assumptions.
The first questionable
assumption underlying this argument that
tap water does not contain the minerals in
question and is not completely
free of bacteria. This assumption is not supported in the argument. If tap water
is found to contain the same minerals and to
be free of bacteria, the author�s conclusion is substantially undermined.
A second assumption of the argument is that
the water residents of Saluda drink is the same as SNSW. Lacking evidence to the
contrary, it is possible that Saluda is not the
source of the bottled water but is merely the place where SNSW is bottled. No
evidence is offered in the argument to
dispute this possibility.
Finally, it
is assumed without argument that the
reason residents are hospitalized less frequently than the national average is
that they drink SNSW. Again, no evidence
is offered to support this assumption. Perhaps the residents are hospitalized
less frequently because they are younger
than the national average, because they are all vegetarians, or because they
exercise daily. That is, there might be other
reasons than the one cited to account for this disparity.
In conclusion, this is an unconvincing
argument. To strengthen the conclusion that SNSW is more healthful than tap
water, the author must provide evidence
that tap water contains harmful bacteria not found in SNSW. Moreover, the author
must demonstrate that the residents of
Saluda regularly drink the same water as SNSW and that this is why they are
hospitalized less frequently than the national
average.
|
|