yuki11 Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 Hi I am struggling with GRE Analytical Writing Essay. I got 3.0 two times. I would really appreciate your help! The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager. "One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one-third of its original flow. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further." The author hastily put forward the solution to increase the profit of Sunnyside Towrs. At first glance the author's argument seems somewhat convincing. However, further reflection reveals that the statement omits some substantial concerns that should be adressed and thus it is not cogent enough to substantiate the argument. The argument at least suffers from at least three main logical flaws. To start with, the author's assumption that the change will obviously result in a considerable saving for Sunnyside Corporation is unwarranted. This stamement is based on uncertain premise that the actual reading of water usage after the adjustment will be much lower than the one before the adjustment. It might be possible that people living in the higher floors are using more water because they do not get as much water pressure as before. For instance, if people cannot clean dirty dishes very well because of the lower water pressure, they would use more water for longer time in order to clean the dishes completely. If the author wants to substantiate his claim, he should wait and compare the actual reading of water usage before the adjustment and the one after. In addition, the author stated that except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. I believe that the author clearly failed to take those complaints seriously. Those complaints might be a tip of iceburg. Behind those few comoplaints, there might be many complaints and dissatisfaction that is not yet asserted. In order to support his claim, the author should take a questionnaire investigation to make sure that residents of the Sunnyside Tower appartment do not have any more complaints and dissatisfaction. Finally, it should be noted that the owner wrote the letter one month after the adjustment. This fact would increase the possibility of people using more water for longer time without noticing. Also, there probably will be an increasing number of complaints since they would know the fact that the owner lowered the water pressure without notice in advance. To sum up, the author has failed to substantiate his claim that restrictin of the water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase their profits. The proof refered in the passage do not led the strong support to what the author maintains. Without additional evidence, howerver, we should be very circumspect about accepting the truth of the author's conclusion. (407words) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now