GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模擬試卷3（共14題）

GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模擬試卷3（共7套）（共14題）GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模擬試卷第1套一、陳述觀點(diǎn)(本題共1題，每題1.0分，共1分。)1、Asweacquiremoreknowledge,thingsdonotbecomemorecomprehensible,butmorecomplexandmysterious.Writearesponseinwhichyoudiscusstheextenttowhichyouagreeordisagreewiththestatementandexplainyourreasoningforthepositionyoutake.Indevelopingandsupportingyourposition,youshouldconsiderwaysinwhichthestatementmightormightnotholdtrueandexplainhowtheseconsiderationsshapeyourposition.標(biāo)準(zhǔn)答案：Weliveinaneraofknowledgeexplosion:hundredsandthousandsofresearcharticlesarebeingpublishedeachdayandwenowhaveaccesstomoreknowledgethanourpredecessorscouldpossiblyimagine.Howdoestheaccumulationofknowledgeshapeourunderstandingoftheworldaroundus?Onewouldnaturallyexpectthatmoreknowledgecouldbettershedlightonmysteriesandenigmas,butsomepeopleclaimthatthingsactuallybecomemorecomplexandmysteriousasmoreknowledgeisacquired.Frommypointofview,withintheexistingknowledgeframeworkitistruethatmoreknowledgemakesthingsmorecomprehensible,providedthatthepreviousunderstandingiscorrect.Whenthenewdiscoveriesfundamentallychangetheexistingframeworkofcomprehension,however,thingsdoappearmorecomplexandmysteriousasaresultofsuchnewknowledge.Tobeginwith,Iagreethatwithintheframeofexistingknowledge,moreknowledgeisconducivetoabettercomprehension.Thisisbecausethebroaderframeofknowledgeremainsthesame,sonewdiscoveriesdonotraisenewquestions.Forexample,scholarsintheancientGreecehavebeenpainfullydebatingonthenatureofthemovementofcelestialbodies.Itwasnotunderstoodwhyfruitswouldfallfromtreesinautumn,butstarsalwaysshineinthenightsky.ThencameSirIsaacNewton.Thethreelawsofmotionnamedafterhimprovideasatisfactoryexplanationtotheaforementionedobservations.OnecouldconfidentlyarguethatthenewknowledgediscoveredbyNewtongaverisetoamuchclearerandmorethoroughunderstandingofanobject’smotion.Thelinesofreasoningandtheexamplecitedabovedoprovethatinsomecasesnewknowledgemakesthingsmorecomprehensible,butthereisoneunspokenprerequisite:existingunderstandingcannotbetotallywrongandbecomescontradictorytonewdiscoveries.Ifthisveryprerequisiteisnotmet,onecouldimaginetheconfusionbroughtaboutbytheclashofinformation.Acaseinpointhereishumanbeings’questforunderstandingEarth’splaceintheuniverse.Duetoitsappealingreligiousinterpretations,geocentricismhaslongdominatedpeople’sperceptionuntiltheCopernicusofferaheliocentricalternative.Copernicus’smodel,basedondiligentobservationsofcelestialmovement,shockedhiscontemporaries.AllofasuddenEarth’splacebecamemorecomplexandinscrutable,butinhindsightwecouldattributethisconfusiontothefaultyunderstandingofthegeocentricmodel.Hence,newknowledgecouldindeedmakethingsappearmoremysteriousandcomplexifatoddswithexistingknowledgethatisbasedoninaccurateunderstanding.Finally,thediscussionabovehingesononeimportantpremise:theframeworkofknowledgeispreservedthroughouttheacquiringofknowledge.Yetinrealitymanydiscoveriesshooksuchframework,anditbecomesaninevitableconsequencethattheemergenceofnew,foreigninformationmakesthingslesscomprehensible.Twoexamplescouldstrengthenmypointhere.Sinceearlyhumanbeingsstartedusingstonesandforgingmetals,wehavebeenstudyingthepropertyofmaterialsandaccumulatedaconsiderableamountofknowledge.Yet,progressesinnano-technologyinthe1980sdiscoveredasurprisingseriesofpropertiesthatcannotbeexplainedbyexistingtheories,becauseonnano-scalematerialsobeyasetofrulesdifferentfromthetraditionalmaterials.Anotherexampleistheclassificationoflife.Historicallyphilosophersandbiologistsdividedalllivingbeingsintoanimalsandplants,butthemicroscopeinventedinthelate1500sledtothediscoveryofmicroorganisms.Theexistenceofsuchpreviouslyinvisibletinylivingbeingsmadepeoplebecomegreatlyperplexedandrealizetheenormouscomplexityoflife.Tothem,lifesuddenlybecamemoremysteriousanditforcedscholarstocomeupwithanewparadigmforlifeclassification.Thesetwoexamplesdemonstrateafieldwillappeartobemuchmorecomplexandmysteriousthanpreviouslythoughtinlightofthediscoveriesthatfundamentallyreshapetheknowledgeframework.Tosumup,whenweacquirenewknowledgethatiscompatiblewiththeframeworkofexistingknowledge,thingsbecomemorecomprehensible.Thatsaid,ifthenewknowledgeisindirectcontradictiontocurrentknow-how,orifthenewknowledgerepresentsafundamentalshiftintheframework,thingsdoappearmorecomplexandmysterious.(681words)知識(shí)點(diǎn)解析：本題是一篇“反直覺”的題目，通常在我們的理念中，新的知識(shí)應(yīng)該是讓我們的世界越來越清晰易懂，但本題卻提出了一個(gè)反向的觀點(diǎn)：新的知識(shí)讓世界變得更加神秘和難懂。面對(duì)這種違背人們直覺的論斷，我們更要靜下心來思考。具體到本題而言，新的知識(shí)究竟怎樣改造了我們對(duì)世界的認(rèn)知?這要取決于新的知識(shí)究竟是補(bǔ)充性(complementary)的還是顛覆性的。很顯然，如果新的知識(shí)是顛覆性的(如本文第三主旨段所說)，推翻了原有的認(rèn)知世界的框架和知識(shí)體系，那它當(dāng)然會(huì)帶來困惑與不解，因?yàn)槲覀兏玫卣J(rèn)識(shí)到了世界的復(fù)雜性。這里要提醒讀者注意的一點(diǎn)是，有的同學(xué)可能會(huì)認(rèn)為這是一種“不可知論”，但事實(shí)上并非如此，顛覆性的知識(shí)給我們展示的是世界的復(fù)雜性，但世界的本質(zhì)沒有改變。換言之，客觀世界仍然是那個(gè)客觀世界，但是新知識(shí)讓我們看到了更多。按照這個(gè)思路繼續(xù)推論，人類也許會(huì)有徹底認(rèn)清世界的那一天，只有在那個(gè)我們對(duì)世間萬物已經(jīng)無所不知、無所不曉的時(shí)刻，我們才可以說新知識(shí)再也不會(huì)帶來更多的困惑和神秘。對(duì)此，筆者推薦大家去閱讀著名科幻作家阿西莫夫的小說《最后的問題》(TheLastQuestion)，思考當(dāng)有一天人類窮盡了所有的問題，走入了時(shí)間的盡頭，宇宙和智慧生命將以何種姿態(tài)存在?，F(xiàn)在再讓我們回到“補(bǔ)充性”的知識(shí)這一欄，正如本文第一和第二主旨段所說的那樣，如果新的知識(shí)和信息不與現(xiàn)有的認(rèn)知體系相沖突，又會(huì)有什么結(jié)果呢?本文認(rèn)為這要看新舊知識(shí)之間是否存在矛盾與沖突，具體來說，得看過去的認(rèn)知是否正確。如果我們過去的認(rèn)知是錯(cuò)誤的，顯然新的知識(shí)會(huì)帶來(短暫的)混亂。當(dāng)然，我們要承認(rèn)從更長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)的角度來說，補(bǔ)充性的知識(shí)也會(huì)讓世界變得更加易懂，因?yàn)殄e(cuò)誤的認(rèn)識(shí)會(huì)被正確的認(rèn)知所取代，如同地心說被日心說取代，而日心說被當(dāng)代的宇宙學(xué)取代一樣。結(jié)合上面所述知識(shí)的最終邊界，這暗示本題另一種破題方法是短期與長(zhǎng)期，讀者不妨試試從這個(gè)角度下筆，用本題來做一個(gè)寫作訓(xùn)練。二、評(píng)估論證(本題共1題，每題1.0分，共1分。)2、ThecitizensofForsythehaveadoptedmorehealthfullifestyles.Theirresponsestoarecentsurveyshowthatintheireatinghabitstheyconformmorecloselytogovernmentnutritionalrecommendationsthantheydidtenyearsago.Furthermore,therehasbeenafourfoldincreaseinsalesoffoodproductscontainingkiran,asubstancethatascientificstudyhasshownreducescholesterol.Thistrendisalsoevidentinreducedsalesofsulia,afoodthatfewofthehealthiestcitizensregularlyeat.Writearesponseinwhichyouexaminethestatedand/orunstatedassumptionsoftheargument.Besuretoexplainhowtheargumentdependsontheseassumptionsandwhattheimplicationsarefortheargumentiftheassumptionsproveunwarranted.標(biāo)準(zhǔn)答案：Inthisargument,theauthorclaimsthatForsythecitizenshaveadoptedamorehealthfullifestylebasedonasurveyandsomemarketfacts.Althoughthisconclusionmightbecorrect,therearesomeflawsinhislinesofreasoningthatpreventusmakinganinformedjudgment.Specifically,hisorherconclusionreliesuponaseriesofunfoundedassumptions,which,whenproveunwarranted,willseriouslyweakentheclaimthatForsythecitizenshaveadoptedahealthierlifestyle.Tostartwith,theauthorcitesasurveyaboutpeople’sconformitytonutritionalrecommendationswithanunderlyingassumptionaboutthevalidityofthissurvey.Yet,noadditionalsupportinginformationisprovidedandthissurveycouldbeproblematicbecausewedonotknowwhereitwasconductedandhowmanypeoplewereinterviewed.Ifitturnsoutthatthissurveywasdoneinagrocerystorespecializedinorganicfoodsthattargetsaspecificgroupofpeople,theresultcouldbepotentiallybiasedwhileinrealitymostconsumerswouldnotconformtonationalnutritionalrecommendationsbetterthantheydidtenyearsago.Inthiscasethesurveywouldbeinvalid,andthesubsequentinterpretationwouldn’tbemeaningful.Second,beforetheimplicationofthechangeinthesaleofproductscontainingkirancouldbemade,weneedtoconsiderifsuchproductsaretrulywholesomeastheauthorimplicitlyassumes.Whilekiranitselfmaycontainhealthbenefits,othersubstancesinthoseproductsmightbedetrimental,becauseofthetoxicchemicalstheymightcontainduringthemanufacturingprocesses.Suchscenarioscannotbeconfidentlyrejectedbytheavailableinformationpresentedbytheauthor,andathoroughreportonthehealtheffectsofthefoodproductscontainingkiranisneededtoevaluatedifferentpossibilities.Theauthor’sargumentcouldbeweakenedshouldthereportfindthoseproductscapableofproducingnegativeimpactsonhumanhealth.Third,theauthorquotesthedecreaseinthesaleofsulia,whichthehealthiestcitizensrarelyeat,andassumesthisisapieceofevidencethatpeoplehaveacquiredamorehealthfullifestyle.Nonetheless,heorshedoesnotconclusivelyestablishthatthechangeisdrivenbypeople’shealthawareness.Inreality,manyfactorscanchangethesaleofaparticularfoodproduct.Giventhelimitedamountofinformationwecan’tdetermineifhealthawarenessisthedecisiveone.Forexample,itmaylaterturnoutthatpeoplerefrainfrompurchasingsuliaduetoitsexorbitantprice,andinthiscasethesaleofsuliadoesnotlendanysupporttotheauthor’sconclusion.Finally,evenifweacknowledgethatalltheaforementionedassumptionsarevalidandtheinterpretationofthechangeinsalesofdifferentproductsisreasonable,acriticalquestionstillneedsourcloseattention:caneatinghabitsaccuratelyandfaithfullyreflectpeople’shealthlifestyle?Whiletheauthorhereassumesastronglink,thetrueanswermaynotbethecase.AmorecomprehensivestudyonthelifestylesofForsytheresidentswouldbehighlyvaluablewithregardtothisquestion.Ifthenewstudyrevealsastrongcommitmenttophysicalexerciseandmentalwell-beinginadditiontonutritionintake,theauthor’sconclusionwillundoubtedlybemoreconvincing.Tosumup,althoughitmaybetruethatForsythecitizensnowhaveamorehealthfullifestyle,thisconclusioncannotbesafelydeducedfromtheauthor’sargumentandlinesofreasoningduetosomeofhisorherquestionableassumptions.Whentheseassumptionsturnouttobewrong,hisorherconclusionaboutthelifestyleofthecitizensofForsythewillbesubstantiallyundermined.(578words)知識(shí)點(diǎn)解析：這道題目的結(jié)構(gòu)很簡(jiǎn)單，作者通過三個(gè)并列的證據(jù)得出了F地居民生活習(xí)慣變得更為健康的結(jié)論，框架如下：調(diào)查表明居民飲食結(jié)構(gòu)比十年前更符合政府的推薦+含有kiran物質(zhì)的食物銷量上升，可以減少膽固醇+含有sulia物質(zhì)的食物銷量下降(健康人不吃suIia)→結(jié)論：Forsythe居民生活習(xí)慣變得更健康了這三個(gè)信息本身都存在一些問題，這些變化不一定真實(shí)反映出F地居民在飲食習(xí)慣上的變化。例如某種物質(zhì)的攝入量發(fā)生了變化，究竟是人們的健康意識(shí)發(fā)生了改變。還是僅僅是這些物質(zhì)的價(jià)格發(fā)生了變化?針對(duì)每一個(gè)單獨(dú)的點(diǎn)我們都可以進(jìn)行分析，這是最為簡(jiǎn)單的分析方法。但是，如果只分析以上的內(nèi)容，文章的分?jǐn)?shù)不會(huì)高于5分，因?yàn)楸疚倪€有一個(gè)很重要但是卻很隱秘的點(diǎn)——飲食習(xí)慣能否真實(shí)反映出健康的生活習(xí)慣?這里作者其實(shí)做了一個(gè)偷換概念的假設(shè)，把生活習(xí)慣與飲食習(xí)慣等同了起來。這一類型的“偷換概念”在GRE作文中往往是不容易發(fā)現(xiàn)的點(diǎn)，但是卻非常重要。很多時(shí)候一個(gè)概念的變化可以成為破題的關(guān)鍵，其他時(shí)候則成為了沖擊高分的必備段落。GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模擬試卷第2套一、陳述觀點(diǎn)(本題共1題，每題1.0分，共1分。)1、Claim:Thebesttestofanargumentisitsabilitytoconvincesomeonewithanopposingviewpoint.Reason:Onlybybeingforcedtodefendanideaagainstthedoubtsandcontrastingviewsofothersdoesonereallydiscoverthevalueofthatidea.Writearesponseinwhichyoudiscusstheextenttowhichyouagreeordisagreewiththeclaimandthereasononwhichthatclaimisbased.標(biāo)準(zhǔn)答案：Theclaimthatthebesttestofanargumentisitsabilitytoconvincesomeonewithanopposingviewpointisacompellingone.Thereasongivenforthisclaimisthatonlythroughdefendinganideaagainstallpossiblecriticismdoestheideagaintrueandtestedmerit.Indeed,itisthisveryreasonwhichformsthebasisofacademicscholarship:bydebatinganddiscussingopposingideasinacollectivediscourse,weareabletohomeinuponthoseideaswhicharetrulyofvalue.Theconceptthatanargumentshouldbebasedonsoundprinciplesthatconvinceeventhosewhoarebiasedagainstitfallsinlinewiththefoundationofourpost-Enlightenmentsocietyofreason.Consider,forexample,twodisparatepoliticalpartieswithvastlydifferentapproachestogoverningacountry.If,inthistensepoliticalclimate,arepresentativefromonepartyraisesanargumentwhichshecandefendopenlyinfrontofagroupofheropponents,thevalueoftheideabecomesclear.Say,perhaps,thatarepresentativeproposesanewstrategyforincreasingemploymentwhichfallsmuchmoreinlinewithherownparty’sphilosophythanwiththeotherparty’s.Byarguingwithrepresentativesfromtheopposingparty,andbyaddressingeachandeverycounterpointthattheyraisetohernewemploymentpolicy,thepotentialflawsinherideaarelaidutterlybare.Furthermore,thelogicandreasonofherpointsmustbemeasuredinthebalanceagainstthebiasesandemotionsofherlisteners.Ifaftersuchaconversationsheisabletoconvincetheopposingpartythatherproposalholdssomemeritandmightactuallybebeneficialforthecitizensoftheircountry,thenitsvaluebecomesfarmoreevidentthanifshewereadictatorwhohadmerelyadministeredhervisionunchecked.Itisapparentfromthisexamplethattheideologyofconvincingotherswithopposingviewpointsispervasiveinthewaymanygovernmentsandinstitutionsarestructured,suchasourown—throughchecksandbalances,publicdiscourse,andproductivedisagreement.Thestrongestreasonfortheexcerpt’svalidityisfoundbycomparingtheclaimtoitsreverse.Imagineascenariowhereoneisaskedtopresentone’sargument,butthegroupofpeopletowhomoneispresentingalreadyespousethoseveryideas:"preachingtothechoir"istheubiquitousidiomweusetodescribethisphenomenon.Inthissituation,itbecomesirrelevantwhetherornotaparticularargumentholdsthoseindicatorsofmerit:logicandreasongroundedinevidence.Eventhemostinflammatoryortenuousargumentswouldnotbeexposedfortheirtruehollownessbyagroupwhowereunwillingorunabletoquestionthespeaker.The"choir"presentsnochallengetotheargument,andindoingsotheargument’smeritcannotbetested.Infact,itisthislackofchallengewhichcanleadtostagnationbothinthegoverningofnations—consider,asmentionedabove,dictatorswhoeliminatethepossibilityofdissent—andinacademicdiscourse,wherecomplacencywithprevailingideascanhaltthecreationofnewandpossiblycontradictoryfindings.Forthis,weseethatbeingforcedtodefendanideaagainstthedoubtofothersdoesindeedbringoutitstrueworth;intheopposingsituation,whetherornottheargumentholdsintrinsicmerit,thismeritcannotbetestedordiscernedinanyway.Thereis,however,onemodificationwhichmakestheclaimmorecomplete.Theclaimsuggeststhatthebesttestforanargumentisitsabilitytoconvinceothers,whichmayleadtotheinferencethatanargumentwhichcannotconvinceothersholdsnovalue.However,thisinferenceisnottrue,andhereliesthecaveattotheclaim.Throughouthistorythereareideasorargumentsthatareperhapstoomodern,beyondtheirtimes,andinthesesituationsthosewhoopposethemrefusetobelieveanargumentthatislaterondiscoveredtobeentirelytrueandvalid.Imagine,forexample,Galileo’sattemptstoconvincehiscontemporariesthattheEarthrevolvedaroundtheSun,andnotviceversa.Inthescientificclimateofhistime,otherssimplycouldn’tacceptGalileo’sreasonedargumentdespitehismultipleattemptstoconvincethem.Inthisinstance,thevalueofGalileo’sargumentactuallycouldnotbetestedbydefendingitinfrontofothers.Thevalueonlybecameapparentlateron,whenotherscientistsbegantorepeatandunderstandtheinsightfulcalculationsthatGalileohadmademuchearlier.Sowhileconvincingtheoppositioniscertainlyonemarkofagoodargument,itisnotalwaystheultimatetest.Inconclusion,theexamplesdiscussedrevealthattheworthofanargumentcanbemeasuredthroughitsabilitytowithstanddissentanddoubt.Aslongasanargumentisnotdeemedinvalidbythemerefactthatnoothersarepersuadedbyit,itisreasonabletoclaimthatthebestwaytotestanargumentistoattempttoconvincethosewhoopposeit.知識(shí)點(diǎn)解析：Inaddressingthespecifictaskdirections,thisoutstandingresponsepresentsacogentexaminationoftheissueandconveysmeaningskillfully.Afterstatingaclearpositioninagreementwithboththeclaimanditsreason,thewriteremphasizesthesignificanceofthelatter:"Itisthisveryreasonwhichformsthebasisofacademicscholarship:bydebatinganddiscussingopposingideasinacollectivediscourse,weareabletohomeinuponthoseideaswhicharetrulyofvalue."Skillfully,thewriterdemonstratesthevalidityoftheclaimbycomparingargumentspresentedtodifferentaudiences.First,apoliticalrepresentativedefendsaproposalagainsttheargumentsoftheopposingparty.Here,theproposalisfullytested"throughchecksandbalances,publicdiscourse,andproductivedisagreement."Incontrast,thewriterconsidersasimilarpresentationofideastoalike-mindedgroup("preachingtothechoir")andconcludesthat,intheabsenceofdiscourseordissent,themeritofanideacannotbedetermined.Finally,thewriterreexaminestheclaimandfindsanexceptiontoit(therejectionbyhiscontemporariesofGalileo’sreasonedargument),andmodifiestheclaimasfollows:"Sowhileconvincingtheoppositioniscertainlyonemarkofagoodargument,itisnotalwaystheultimatetest."Examplesandreasonsarebothcompellingandpersuasive,andlanguageandsyntaxareconsistentlypreciseandeffective,asinthefollowing:"Infact,itisthislackofchallengewhichcanleadtostagnationbothinthegoverningofnations—consider,asmentionedabove,dictatorswhoeliminatethepossibilityofdissent—andinacademicdiscourse,wherecomplacencywithprevailingideascanhaltthecreationofnewandpossiblycontradictoryfindings."Becauseofitssuperiorfacility,fluentandprecisepresentationofideas,andclearandinsightfulposition,thisresponseclearlyearnsascoreof6.二、評(píng)估論證(本題共1題，每題1.0分，共1分。)2、InsurveysMasonCityresidentsrankwatersports(swimming,boating,andfishing)amongtheirfavoriterecreationalactivities.TheMasonRiverflowingthroughthecityisrarelyusedforthesepursuits,however,andthecityparkdepartmentdevoteslittleofitsbudgettomaintainingriversiderecreationalfacilities.Foryearstherehavebeencomplaintsfromresidentsaboutthequalityoftheriverswaterandtheriverssmell.Inresponse,thestatehasrecentlyannouncedplanstocleanupMasonRiver.Useoftheriverforwatersportsis,therefore,suretoincrease.Thecitygovernmentshouldforthatreasondevotemoremoneyinthisyear’sbudgettoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Writearesponseinwhichyouexaminethestatedand/orunstatedassumptionsoftheargument.Besuretoexplainhowtheargumentdependsontheassumptionsandwhattheimplicationsareiftheassumptionsproveunwarranted.標(biāo)準(zhǔn)答案：WhileitmaybetruethattheMasonCitygovernmentoughttodevotemoremoneytoriversiderecreationalfacilities,thisauthor’sargumentdoesnotmakeacogentcaseforincreasedresourcesbasedonriveruse.Itiseasytounderstandwhycityresidentswouldwantacleanerriver,butthisargumentisrifewithholesandassumptions,andthus,notstrongenoughtoleadtoincreasedfunding.Citingsurveysofcityresidents,theauthorreportscityresident’sloveofwatersports.Itisnotclear,however,thescopeandvalidityofthatsurvey.Forexample,thesurveycouldhaveaskedresidentsiftheypreferusingtheriverforwatersportsorwouldliketoseeahydroelectricdambuilt,whichmayhaveswayedresidentstowardriversports.Thesamplemaynothavebeenrepresentativeofcityresidents,askingonlythoseresidentswholiveupontheriver.Thesurveymayhavebeen10pageslong,with2questionsdedicatedtoriversports.Wejustdonotknow.Unlessthesurveyisfullyrepresentative,valid,andreliable,itcannotbeusedtoeffectivelybacktheauthor’sargument.Additionally,theauthorimpliesthatresidentsdonotusetheriverforswimming,boating,andfishing,despitetheirprofessedinterest,becausethewaterispollutedandsmelly.Whileapolluted,smellyriverwouldlikelycutdownonriversports,aconcreteconnectionbetweentheresident’slackofriveruseandtheriver’scurrentstateisnoteffectivelymade.Thoughtherehavebeencomplaints,wedonotknowiftherehavebeennumerouscomplaintsfromawiderangeofpeople,orperhapsfromoneortwoindividualswhomadenumerouscomplaints.Tostrengthenhis/herargument,theauthorwouldbenefitfromimplementinganormedsurveyaskingawiderangeofresidentswhytheydonotcurrentlyusetheriver.Buildingupontheimplicationthatresidentsdonotusetheriverduetothequalityoftheriver’swaterandthesmell,theauthorsuggeststhatarivercleanupwillresultinincreasedriverusage.Iftheriver’swaterqualityandsmellresultfromproblemswhichcanbecleaned,thismaybetrue.Forexample,ifthedecreasedwaterqualityandaromaiscausedbypollutionbyfactoriesalongtheriver,thisconceivablycouldberemedied.Butifthequalityandaromaresultsfromthenaturalmineraldepositsinthewaterorsurroundingrock,thismaynotbetrue.Therearesomebodiesofwaterwhichemitastrongsmellofsulphurduetothegeographyofthearea.Thisisnotsomethinglikelytobeafffectedbyaclean-up.Consequently,arivercleanupmayhavenoimpactuponriverusage.Regardlessofwhethertheriver’squalityisabletobeimprovedornot,theauthordoesnoteffectivelyshowaconnectionbetweenwaterqualityandriverusage.Aclean,beautiful,saferiveroftenaddstoacity’spropertyvalues,leadstoincreasedtourismandrevenuefromthosewhocometotakeadvantageoftheriver,andabetteroverallqualityoflifeforresidents.Forthesereasons,citygovernmentmaydecidetoinvestinimprovingriversiderecreationalfacilities.However,thisauthor’sargumentisnotlikelysignificantlypersuadethecitygovermenttoallocateincreasedfunding.知識(shí)點(diǎn)解析：ThisargumentcitesasurveytosupportthepredictionthattheuseoftheMasonRiverissuretoincreaseandthusrecommendsthatthecitygovernmentshoulddevotemoremoneyinthisyear’sbudgettotheriversiderecreationalfacilities.Indevelopingyourevaluation,youareaskedtoexaminetheargumentsstatedand/orunstatedassumptionsanddiscusswhattheimplicationsareiftheassumptionsproveunwarranted.Asuccessfulresponse,then,mustdiscussboththeargument’sassumptionsANDtheimplicationsoftheseassumptionsfortheargument.Aresponsethatdoesnotaddresstheseaspectsofthetaskwillnotreceiveascoreof4orhigher,regardlessofthequalityofitsotherfeatures.Thoughresponsesmaywellraiseotherpointsnotmentionedhereandneednotmentionallofthesepoints,someassumptionsoftheargument,andsomewaysinwhichtheargumentdependsonthoseassumptions,include:Theassumptionthatpeoplewhorankwatersports"amongtheirfavoriterecreationalactivities"areactuallylikelytoparticipateinthem.(Itispossiblethattheyjustliketowatchthem.)ThisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatuseoftheriverforwatersportsissuretoincreaseafterthestatecleansuptheMasonRiverandthatthecityshouldforthatreasondevotemoremoneytoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Theassumptionthatwhatresidentssayinsurveyscanbetakenatfacevalue.(Itispossiblethatsurveyresultsexaggeratetheinterestinwatersports.)ThisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatuseoftheriverforwatersportsissuretoincreaseafterthestatecleansuptheMasonRiverandthatthecityshouldforthatreasondevotemoremoneytoriversiderecreationalfacilities.TheassumptionthatMasonCityresidentswouldactuallywanttodowatersportsintheMasonRiver.(Asrecreationalactivities,itispossiblethatwatersportsareregardedaspursuitsforvacationsandweekendsawayfromthecity.)ThisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatuseoftheriverforwatersportsissuretoincreaseafterthestatecleansuptheMasonRiverandthatthecityshouldforthatreasondevotemoremoneytoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Theassumptionthattheparkdepartmentdevotinglittleofitsbudgettomaintainingriversiderecreationalfacilitiesmeansthatthesefacilitiesareinadequatelymaintained.Thisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatthecityshoulddevotemoremoneyinthisyear’sbudgettoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Ifcurrentfacilitiesareadequatelymaintained,thenincreasedfundingmightnotbeneededevenifrecreationaluseoftheriverdoesincrease.Theassumptionthattheriversiderecreationalfacilitiesarefacilitiesdesignedforpeoplewhoparticipateinwatersportsandnotsomeotherrecreationalpursuit.Thisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatthecityshoulddevotemoremoneyinthisyearsbudgettoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Theassumptionthatthedirtinessoftheriveristhecauseofitsbeinglittleusedandthatcleaninguptheriverwillbesufficienttoincreaserecreationaluseoftheriver.(Residentsmighthavecomplainedaboutthewaterqualityandsmelleveniftheyhadnodesiretoboat,swim,orfishintheriver.)Thisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatthestatesplantocleanuptheriverwillresultinincreaseduseoftheriverforwatersports.Theassumptionthatthecomplaintsabouttheriverarenumerousandsignificant.Thisassumptionmotivatesthestatesplantocleanuptheriverandunderliestheclaimthatuseoftheriverforwatersportsissuretoincrease.(Perhapsthecomplaintsarecomingfromaverysmallminority,inwhichcasecleaningtherivermightbeamisuseofstatefunds.)Theassumptionthatthestatescleanupwilloccursoonenoughtorequireadjustmentstothisyear’sbudget.Thisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatthecityshoulddevotemoremoneyinthisyearsbudgettoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Theassumptionthatthecleanup,whenithappens,willbenefitthosepartsoftheriveraccessiblefromthecity’sfacilities.Thisassumptionunderliestheclaimthatthecityshoulddevotemoremoneytoriversiderecreationalfacilities.Theassumptionthatthecitygovernmentoughttodevotemoreattentiontomaintainingarecreationalfacilityifdemandforthatfacilityincreases.Theassumptionthatthecityshouldfinancethenewprojectandnotsomeotheragencyorgroup(publicorprivate).Shouldoneormoreoftheaboveassumptionsproveunwarranted,theimplicationsfortheargumentarethat:thelogicoftheargumentfallsapart/isinvalid/isunsound.thestateandcityarespendingtheirfundsunne