lsuguy7 wrote:
Here is an essay I wrote for a PR Test - Graded a 6.0 (normally they grade harder than real thing)
Prompt: “The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked, both its economy and national identity are endangered. Because illegal immigrants pose such threats, every effort must be made to return them to their country of origin.”
Assignment: Discuss how well-reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion, be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
"This argument relies heavily on unverified assumptions and has a very extreme conclusion. The author fails to make logical connections between the evidence provided and the conclusion that all illegal aliens must be returned to their country of origin.
The first problem with the argument is that it suffers from multiple unsubstantiated claims. The first evidence that is given to support the extreme conclusion is that the autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders. This statement is also extreme because it infers that every countries autonomy could be ranked by the strength of its borders. There are many European countries that have very little strength exerted at the borders, but still maintain autonomy. The author should clarify this statement by grouping countries together or using a more vague statement that would include most countries but not all.
The next statement in the argument is conditional phrase stating that the more illegal immigrants that enter a country the worse off the economy and national identity will be. While this statement might be true for some countries it is certainly not true for all countries. The very foundation of early US society was based on immigrant labor and culture that brought from over the sea. There are still many countries whose economy is heavily dependent on immigrant labor. Even though many economist feel this statement is true in the US today, most would disagree that this statement is true of all countries.
The final portion of the author's argument is the conclusion. The conclusion states that the because of disadvantages mentioned earlier all illegal immigrants must be returned to their country of origin. Although this statement might appear to be a logical conclusion of this extreme argument it fails to take extra information into account. The author doesn't give any indication on how extreme these problems will be or how costly it will be to return the amount of illegal aliens to their home country. What if the cost to the economy was half the amount that it would cost to send all of the immigrants back to their country of origin? The author could use some monetary figures to prove that some savings would be incurred if all illegal immigrants were deported.
In conclusion, the argument suffers from logical flaws and makes an extreme conclusion based on unproven assumptions. The addition of hard examples and connections between the statements would prove to strengthen the argument."
*This just shows you how you don't have to write great to get a good score*
Prompt: “The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked, both its economy and national identity are endangered. Because illegal immigrants pose such threats, every effort must be made to return them to their country of origin.”
Assignment: Discuss how well-reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion, be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
"This argument relies heavily on unverified assumptions and has a very extreme conclusion. The author fails to make logical connections between the evidence provided and the conclusion that all illegal aliens must be returned to their country of origin.
The first problem with the argument is that it suffers from multiple unsubstantiated claims. The first evidence that is given to support the extreme conclusion is that the autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders. This statement is also extreme because it infers that every countries autonomy could be ranked by the strength of its borders. There are many European countries that have very little strength exerted at the borders, but still maintain autonomy. The author should clarify this statement by grouping countries together or using a more vague statement that would include most countries but not all.
The next statement in the argument is conditional phrase stating that the more illegal immigrants that enter a country the worse off the economy and national identity will be. While this statement might be true for some countries it is certainly not true for all countries. The very foundation of early US society was based on immigrant labor and culture that brought from over the sea. There are still many countries whose economy is heavily dependent on immigrant labor. Even though many economist feel this statement is true in the US today, most would disagree that this statement is true of all countries.
The final portion of the author's argument is the conclusion. The conclusion states that the because of disadvantages mentioned earlier all illegal immigrants must be returned to their country of origin. Although this statement might appear to be a logical conclusion of this extreme argument it fails to take extra information into account. The author doesn't give any indication on how extreme these problems will be or how costly it will be to return the amount of illegal aliens to their home country. What if the cost to the economy was half the amount that it would cost to send all of the immigrants back to their country of origin? The author could use some monetary figures to prove that some savings would be incurred if all illegal immigrants were deported.
In conclusion, the argument suffers from logical flaws and makes an extreme conclusion based on unproven assumptions. The addition of hard examples and connections between the statements would prove to strengthen the argument."
*This just shows you how you don't have to write great to get a good score*
Thanks for sharing your answer with us, however the argument puts forward the illegal immigrants and how they might deteriorate the state of a country, and you analyze the effect of all immigrants in general (which by the way I find true and valid). The first thing that crossed my mind was "how can I disprove that illegal immigrants are a bad thing for a country?".
Comments would be appreciated.
Thanks