GMAT作文满分的备考之路_GMAT写作

GMAT作文满分的备考之路

　　Obviously, the argument commits a logical fallacy called either-or thinking. The argument above assumes that there are only two possible results open to us----dissatisfied passengers who complained about the baggage-handling procedures and satisfied passengers who did not file a complaint. But there is no room for a middle ground. It is premature to conclude that those who didnt file the complaint were indeed the satisfied customers without any further investigation. What if these individuals had no time to file a complaint or they were unwilling to express their dissatisfaction? If the author cannot provide the relative compelling evidences to prove that the customers who did not file a complaint are indeed pleased with the AAs procedures, the argument is weak and unpersuasive.

　　The second point worth talking is that the sample raised in the allegation is insufficient. First of all, the author does not quote the total number of the passengers last year. For instance, if there was a total number of 1500 passengers who traveled on AA last year, the 1000 passengers in the sample are definitely sufficient. But what if there are over 200,000 passengers who took AA last year? The data in the survey are so limited that they are not representative of the entire passengers under consideration. Furthermore, the author of the argument fails to provide affirmative justification that the passengers in the sample are chose at random. Perhaps these biased passengers were well chosen by the board of the AA in order to demonstrate the excellent baggage-handling service to the general public. In the absence of compelling information to justify how these passengers are chose, it is arbitrary to say that a review of the procedures is unimportant.