GMAT考试写作指导：Argument范文七十

　　20. 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 waster is a wise investment in good health

　　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

　　 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 authors 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.