86. In this argument the author reasons that the failure of Company B portends a
similar fate for Company A. The grounds for this prediction are similarities that exist
between the two companies. The line of reasoning is that since both companies produce
video-game hardware and software and both enjoy a large share of the market for these
products, the failure of one is a reliable predictor of the failure of the other. This
argument is unconvincing.
The major problem with the argument is that the stated similarities between
Company A and B are insufficient to support the conclusion that Company A will suffer
a fats similar to Company Bs. In fact, the similarities stated are irrelevant to that
conclusion. Company B did not fail because of its market share or because of the
general type of product it produced; it failed because children became bored with its
particular line of products. Consequently, the mere fact that Company A holds a large
share of the video-game hardware and software market does not support the claim that
Company A will also fail.
An additional problem with the argument is that there might be relevant
differences between Company A and Company B, which further undermine the
【GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文二六】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02