GRE作文范文 Argument-12

"Claitown University needs both affordable housing for its students and a way to fund the building of such housing. The best solution to this problem is to commission a famous architect known for experimental and futuristic buildings. It is common knowledge that tourists are willing to pay money to tour some of the architect's buildings, so it can be expected that tourists will want to visit this new building. The income from the fees charged to tourists will soon cover the building costs. Furthermore, such a building will attract new students as well as donations from alumni. And even though such a building will be much larger than our current need for student housing, part of the building can be used as office space"

嘉文博译Sample Essay

This argument states that a famous architect that is known for futuristic and experimental buildings should be commissioned to build student housing for Claitown University as a means of gaining affordable housing for its students as well as funding the project. The arguer states that tourists would want to visit such student housing buildings and that the income from tourist fees would soon pay for the building. The arguer also states that the building would attract new students and donations from alumni, and that part of the oversized building could be used as office space. This argument is based on problematic reasoning and fails to convince for several reasons.

First of all, the arguer assumes that because some of a famous architect's other buildings attract tourists and fees, tourists will also pay money to visit the new student housing building built by him or her. There is no justification for such reasoning. It is likely that such other buildings were built in tourist-type areas with the specific purpose in mind of attracting tourists. Examples of such buildings abound: the Empire State Building and the former World Trade Centers of New York, the Oriental Pearl of Shanghai, the Louvre museum building in Paris - all were built with the intention of attracting tourists. These buildings and their surrounding areas all have some intrinsic tourist value. It is highly likely that no matter how unusual the building, very few tourists would go out of their way to a college campus to see a student dormitory building. The argument lacks credibility from this standpoint.

Secondly, hiring a famous architect will likely be prohibitively more expensive as such architect's services are in constant demand across the entire world, and only so many buildings can be designed in a certain period of time. The additional fee that the architect alone can command, combined with the likelihood that a futuristic or experimental design will also be tremendously more expensive, makes this idea unworkable. The arguer must be assuming an enormously large income from tourist's fees, which as stated before is extremely unlikely. This second point critically weakens the argument.

Thirdly, the arguer fails to consider the viewpoint of the students that would be living in the futuristic or experimental housing. He or she assumes that such a building would attract students to the university, just as it would supposedly attract tourists. Even assuming that it would attract tourists, what student, or person for that matter, wants to live in a home that is constantly toured by strangers? Furthermore, there are safety factors to consider. How safe can a futuristic or experimental building be? This argument must be rejected on safety grounds if for no other reason as an "experimental" building is simply not appropriate for use as student housing.

Furthermore, the arguer assumes that the building would attract donations from alumni. On the contrary, the opposite is more likely. An expensive architect building an expensive student housing project is likely to anger alumni, not please them - it would be seen as a waste of money and they would refuse to donate any more to the school. Additionally, without any basis in fact, the arguer states that the building would be much larger than current student housing needs, but that the extra room could be used for office space. This suggests that the arguer has already seen some plans or made some plans, indicating that there may be a conflict of interest here that should be investigated further.

In summary, without actual cost and income estimates, this argument is based on nothing more than pure speculation and perhaps wishful thinking. The argument at best is unconvincing - at worst it reeks of conflict of interest that may warrant investigation into the motives behind the argument.

(627 words)

参考译文

Claitown大学需要为学生提供较为廉价的住房，以及需要寻找到一种方法，来为建造此类住房提供资金。解决这一问题的最佳方案是将建筑设计委托给一位以实验性和未来主义建筑风格著称的建筑设计师。众所周知，观光旅游者均愿意花钱去游览该建筑师设计的某些建筑，因此，我们可以预料，游人将会参观这一新建大楼。从向游人收取的费用中产生的收益将很快就涵盖建造成本。此外，这样一座建筑将吸引新学生来就读，也能吸引校友的捐款。虽然这样一座建筑规模之大会超出我们目前学生住房的需要，但大楼的部分区域可以用作办公空间。

本项论述宣称，一位以未来主义和实验性建筑风格著称的著名建筑师应被授予委托，去为Claitown大学设计建造学生住房，作为一种手段来为其学生获取廉租房，并为该建设项目筹得资金。论述者宣称，旅游者们将希望来参观这样的学生住房建筑，并且从旅游者收费中所产生的收益将很快就可以支付大楼的建设成本。论述者还称，该建筑还将吸引新生入学，吸引校友捐款，并且大楼规模超大部分可用作办公空间。上述论述所依据的是相当成问题的逻辑推理，由于多方面的原因而无法令人信服。

首先，论述者假定，由于一位著名建筑师其他一些建筑物中的有一些曾吸引过旅游者和收费来源，故旅游者们同样也会花钱来参观由这位建筑师所设计建造的这幢新的学生公寓楼。这样一种逻辑推理缺乏丝毫理据。情况有可能是，其他此类建筑建造于旅游区，建造时带着专门吸引旅游者的设想。此类建筑实例比比皆是：纽约的帝国大厦和前世贸大厦，上海的东方明珠塔，巴黎的卢浮宫博物馆建筑--所有这些建筑的建设意图就是为着吸引旅游者。这些建筑以及它们的周边地区都具有一定内在的旅游价值。非常有可能出现的情形是，无论所造的大楼多么的非同异常，很少会有旅游者特意去往一所大学校园，去观赏一幢学生的宿舍楼。从这一观点判断，上述论述缺乏可信度。

其次，雇佣一位著名建筑师将会昂贵至极，因为这样的建筑师，其服务在全球范围内供不应求。这位建筑师一个人所值的额外费用，加诸未来派或实验性设计的费用也将极其高昂这一可能性，使得这一想法无法操作。论述者必定是假定向旅游者收取的费用能带来极为巨大的效益。但这一点我早已陈述过是极为不可能的。这第二点也严重地削弱了论述者的上述论点。

第三，论述者也没有考虑到入住到这座未来派或实验性建筑中的学生的看法。这位论述者自以为这样的一座大楼会吸引学生来该大学入学，如同论述者所假设的能吸引旅游者那样。即使我们假定这幢大楼真的能吸引旅游者，但哪一个学生，或哪一个人会愿意居住在一个不断被陌生人浏览观光的居室里呢?此外，还需要考虑安全因素。一座未来派或实验性质的大楼，其安全程度如何?即使不是因为其他缘由的话，单纯基于安全因素的考量，上述论述亦必须予以推翻，因为一座"实验性质的"大楼根本就不宜用作学生住房。

最后，论述者假设所要建造的大楼将能从校友们那里吸引捐款。相反情况更有可能适得其反。聘请一位收费高昂的建筑师来设计建造一座费用高昂的学生公寓，这一工程可能令校友们怒发冲冠，而不是取悦于他们--这会被视作浪费钱财，他们有可能拒绝再向该校提供任何捐助。此外，在没有任何事实依据的情况下，论述者陈述道，拟建的大楼将会规模庞大，超出目前学生的居住需求，但多余的空间可用作办公空间。这暗示论述者早已预见到了某些计划，或已制定出了某些计划，表明这里存在着某种利害关系的冲突，而这一点正是需要作进一步调查的。

总而言之，在没有实际的成本和收入估计的情况下，上述论述仅仅是基于纯粹的臆测，以及或许是一厢情愿式的思维模式。该论述充其量也是无法令人置信的--从最不利的一方面看，它带有利害关系冲突的色彩，使人觉得有必要调查本项论述背后所隐匿的真实动机