首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint. Reason: Only by being forced
Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint. Reason: Only by being forced
admin
2015-04-25
37
问题
Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.
Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
选项
答案
The claim that the best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint is a compelling one. The reason given for this claim is that only through defending an idea against all possible criticism does the idea gain true and tested merit. Indeed, it is this very reason which forms the basis of academic scholarship: by debating and discussing opposing ideas in a collective discourse, we are able to home in upon those ideas which are truly of value. The concept that an argument should be based on sound principles that convince even those who are biased against it falls in line with the foundation of our post-Enlightenment society of reason. Consider, for example, two disparate political parties with vastly different approaches to governing a country. If, in this tense political climate, a representative from one party raises an argument which she can defend openly in front of a group of her opponents, the value of the idea becomes clear. Say, perhaps, that a representative proposes a new strategy for increasing employment which falls much more in line with her own party’s philosophy than with the other party’s. By arguing with representatives from the opposing party, and by addressing each and every counterpoint that they raise to her new employment policy, the potential flaws in her idea are laid utterly bare. Furthermore, the logic and reason of her points must be measured in the balance against the biases and emotions of her listeners. If after such a conversation she is able to convince the opposing party that her proposal holds some merit and might actually be beneficial for the citizens of their country, then its value becomes far more evident than if she were a dictator who had merely administered her vision unchecked. It is apparent from this example that the ideology of convincing others with opposing viewpoints is pervasive in the way many governments and institutions are structured, such as our own—through checks and balances, public discourse, and productive disagreement. The strongest reason for the excerpt’s validity is found by comparing the claim to its reverse. Imagine a scenario where one is asked to present one’s argument, but the group of people to whom one is presenting already espouse those very ideas: "preaching to the choir" is the ubiquitous idiom we use to describe this phenomenon. In this situation, it becomes irrelevant whether or not a particular argument holds those indicators of merit: logic and reason grounded in evidence. Even the most inflammatory or tenuous arguments would not be exposed for their true hollowness by a group who were unwilling or unable to question the speaker. The "choir" presents no challenge to the argument, and in doing so the argument’s merit cannot be tested. In fact, it is this lack of challenge which can lead to stagnation both in the governing of nations—consider, as mentioned above, dictators who eliminate the possibility of dissent—and in academic discourse, where complacency with prevailing ideas can halt the creation of new and possibly contradictory findings. For this, we see that being forced to defend an idea against the doubt of others does indeed bring out its true worth; in the opposing situation, whether or not the argument holds intrinsic merit, this merit cannot be tested or discerned in any way. There is, however, one modification which makes the claim more complete. The claim suggests that the best test for an argument is its ability to convince others, which may lead to the inference that an argument which cannot convince others holds no value. However, this inference is not true, and here lies the caveat to the claim. Throughout history there are ideas or arguments that are perhaps too modern, beyond their times, and in these situations those who oppose them refuse to believe an argument that is later on discovered to be entirely true and valid. Imagine, for example, Galileo’s attempts to convince his contemporaries that the Earth revolved around the Sun, and not vice versa. In the scientific climate of his time, others simply couldn’t accept Galileo’s reasoned argument despite his multiple attempts to convince them. In this instance, the value of Galileo’s argument actually could not be tested by defending it in front of others. The value only became apparent later on, when other scientists began to repeat and understand the insightful calculations that Galileo had made much earlier. So while convincing the opposition is certainly one mark of a good argument, it is not always the ultimate test. In conclusion, the examples discussed reveal that the worth of an argument can be measured through its ability to withstand dissent and doubt. As long as an argument is not deemed invalid by the mere fact that no others are persuaded by it, it is reasonable to claim that the best way to test an argument is to attempt to convince those who oppose it.
解析
In addressing the specific task directions, this outstanding response presents a cogent examination of the issue and conveys meaning skillfully. After stating a clear position in agreement with both the claim and its reason, the writer emphasizes the significance of the latter: "It is this very reason which forms the basis of academic scholarship: by debating and discussing opposing ideas in a collective discourse, we are able to home in upon those ideas which are truly of value." Skillfully, the writer demonstrates the validity of the claim by comparing arguments presented to different audiences. First, a political representative defends a proposal against the arguments of the opposing party. Here, the proposal is fully tested "through checks and balances, public discourse, and productive disagreement." In contrast, the writer considers a similar presentation of ideas to a like-minded group("preaching to the choir")and concludes that, in the absence of discourse or dissent, the merit of an idea cannot be determined. Finally, the writer reexamines the claim and finds an exception to it(the rejection by his contemporaries of Galileo’s reasoned argument), and modifies the claim as follows: "So while convincing the opposition is certainly one mark of a good argument, it is not always the ultimate test." Examples and reasons are both compelling and persuasive, and language and syntax are consistently precise and effective, as in the following: "In fact, it is this lack of challenge which can lead to stagnation both in the governing of nations—consider, as mentioned above, dictators who eliminate the possibility of dissent—and in academic discourse, where complacency with prevailing ideas can halt the creation of new and possibly contradictory findings." Because of its superior facility, fluent and precise presentation of ideas, and clear and insightful position, this response clearly earns a score of 6.
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/EHkO777K
本试题收录于:
GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING题库GRE分类
0
GRE ANALYTICAL WRITING
GRE
相关试题推荐
Treesareusefultomaninthreeimportantways:theyprovidehimwithwoodandotherproducts;theygivehimshade;andtheyhe
AstheNationalParkServicecelebratesits100thanniversary(周年纪念),PresidentBarackObamahasannouncedtheestablishmentof
Byeducation,Imeantheinfluenceoftheenvironmentupontheindividualtoproduceapermanentchangeinthehabitsofbehavio
Thereisnodoubtthatadults,andevenhighlyeducatedadults,varygreatlyinthespeedandefficiencyoftheirreading.Some
Itseemslikeeverydaythere’ssomenewresearchaboutwhetherourfavoritedrinksaregoodforus.Oneday,sciencesaysagla
KidsoftenaskScoutBassett,ofPalmDesert,California,ifshewishesshehadtwonormallegs.Scout,18,answers,"No.Ihave
Thisoldladyhastwodaughters,______ofwhomislivingnearby.
Asanymiddle-classparentknows,unpaidworkexperiencecangiveyoungstersavaluableintroductiontoasecurejob.Thegovern
DanteGabrielRossetti,thefamous19th-centurypoetandartist,wasonceapproachedbyanelderlyman.Theoldfellowhadsome
Asmileisastrongsignofafriendlyandopenattitudeandawillingnesstocommunicate.Itisapositive,silentsignsentwi
随机试题
在“我的电脑”中要创建文件夹,可以使用的文件菜单命令是
慢性肺源性心脏病主要的死亡原因是
关于性激素的说法,下列哪项是正确的
在安全生产活动中,从业人员应当遵循的义务包括()。
一种有效沟通的福利模式的构成因素是()。
下列节气不在春季的是()。
在甲、乙、丙3个人中,只有一个人是智者,他们一起参加了语文和数学两门考试。他们三人对考试结果的说法如下:甲说:如果我不是智者,我将不能通过语文考试;如果我是智者,我将能通过数学考试。乙说:如果我不是智者,我将不能通过数学考试;如果我是智者,我将能通过语
我国在民族关系问题上坚持的三大基本原则是()。
2020年2月2日,一个令人振奋的消息传来,武汉首座用于集中收治新型冠状病毒感染肺炎患者的专科医院火神山医院,正式交付启用。“十几天建成一家医院”,这是一件令人不可想象的事情,但在中国,在武汉,却成为活生生的现实。从1月25日正式开工到2月2日,前后仅仅9
Formanycountriestherearetwolegalmeansforobtainingtechnology.topermitmultinationalcompaniestoconductbusinesswit
最新回复
(
0
)