GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模拟试卷3（共14题）

GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模拟试卷3（共7套）（共14题）GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模拟试卷第1套一、陈述观点(本题共1题，每题1.0分，共1分。)1、Asweacquiremoreknowledge,thingsdonotbecomemorecomprehensible,butmorecomplexandmysterious.Writearesponseinwhichyoudiscusstheextenttowhichyouagreeordisagreewiththestatementandexplainyourreasoningforthepositionyoutake.Indevelopingandsupportingyourposition,youshouldconsiderwaysinwhichthestatementmightormightnotholdtrueandexplainhowtheseconsiderationsshapeyourposition.标准答案：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)知识点解析：本题是一篇“反直觉”的题目，通常在我们的理念中，新的知识应该是让我们的世界越来越清晰易懂，但本题却提出了一个反向的观点：新的知识让世界变得更加神秘和难懂。面对这种违背人们直觉的论断，我们更要静下心来思考。具体到本题而言，新的知识究竟怎样改造了我们对世界的认知?这要取决于新的知识究竟是补充性(complementary)的还是颠覆性的。很显然，如果新的知识是颠覆性的(如本文第三主旨段所说)，推翻了原有的认知世界的框架和知识体系，那它当然会带来困惑与不解，因为我们更好地认识到了世界的复杂性。这里要提醒读者注意的一点是，有的同学可能会认为这是一种“不可知论”，但事实上并非如此，颠覆性的知识给我们展示的是世界的复杂性，但世界的本质没有改变。换言之，客观世界仍然是那个客观世界，但是新知识让我们看到了更多。按照这个思路继续推论，人类也许会有彻底认清世界的那一天，只有在那个我们对世间万物已经无所不知、无所不晓的时刻，我们才可以说新知识再也不会带来更多的困惑和神秘。对此，笔者推荐大家去阅读著名科幻作家阿西莫夫的小说《最后的问题》(TheLastQuestion)，思考当有一天人类穷尽了所有的问题，走入了时间的尽头，宇宙和智慧生命将以何种姿态存在。现在再让我们回到“补充性”的知识这一栏，正如本文第一和第二主旨段所说的那样，如果新的知识和信息不与现有的认知体系相冲突，又会有什么结果呢?本文认为这要看新旧知识之间是否存在矛盾与冲突，具体来说，得看过去的认知是否正确。如果我们过去的认知是错误的，显然新的知识会带来(短暂的)混乱。当然，我们要承认从更长远的角度来说，补充性的知识也会让世界变得更加易懂，因为错误的认识会被正确的认知所取代，如同地心说被日心说取代，而日心说被当代的宇宙学取代一样。结合上面所述知识的最终边界，这暗示本题另一种破题方法是短期与长期，读者不妨试试从这个角度下笔，用本题来做一个写作训练。二、评估论证(本题共1题，每题1.0分，共1分。)2、ThecitizensofForsythehaveadoptedmorehealthfullifestyles.Theirresponsestoarecentsurveyshowthatintheireatinghabitstheyconformmorecloselytogovernmentnutritionalrecommendationsthantheydidtenyearsago.Furthermore,therehasbeenafourfoldincreaseinsalesoffoodproductscontainingkiran,asubstancethatascientificstudyhasshownreducescholesterol.Thistrendisalsoevidentinreducedsalesofsulia,afoodthatfewofthehealthiestcitizensregularlyeat.Writearesponseinwhichyouexaminethestatedand/orunstatedassumptionsoftheargument.Besuretoexplainhowtheargumentdependsontheseassumptionsandwhattheimplicationsarefortheargumentiftheassumptionsproveunwarranted.标准答案：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)知识点解析：这道题目的结构很简单，作者通过三个并列的证据得出了F地居民生活习惯变得更为健康的结论，框架如下：调查表明居民饮食结构比十年前更符合政府的推荐+含有kiran物质的食物销量上升，可以减少胆固醇+含有sulia物质的食物销量下降(健康人不吃suIia)→结论：Forsythe居民生活习惯变得更健康了这三个信息本身都存在一些问题，这些变化不一定真实反映出F地居民在饮食习惯上的变化。例如某种物质的摄入量发生了变化，究竟是人们的健康意识发生了改变。还是仅仅是这些物质的价格发生了变化?针对每一个单独的点我们都可以进行分析，这是最为简单的分析方法。但是，如果只分析以上的内容，文章的分数不会高于5分，因为本文还有一个很重要但是却很隐秘的点——饮食习惯能否真实反映出健康的生活习惯?这里作者其实做了一个偷换概念的假设，把生活习惯与饮食习惯等同了起来。这一类型的“偷换概念”在GRE作文中往往是不容易发现的点，但是却非常重要。很多时候一个概念的变化可以成为破题的关键，其他时候则成为了冲击高分的必备段落。GRE（ANALYTICALWRITING）模拟试卷第2套一、陈述观点(本题共1题，每题1.0分，共1分。)1、Claim:Thebesttestofanargumentisitsabilitytoconvincesomeonewithanopposingviewpoint.Reason:Onlybybeingforcedtodefendanideaagainstthedoubtsandcontrastingviewsofothersdoesonereallydiscoverthevalueofthatidea.Writearesponseinwhichyoudiscusstheextenttowhichyouagreeordisagreewiththeclaimandthereasononwhichthatclaimisbased.标准答案：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.知识点解析：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、评估论证(本题共1题，每题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.标准答案：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.知识点解析：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