GMAT Essay Topic 524 - The following appeared in a corporate planning memorandum for a company that develops amusement parks. "Because travel from our country to foreign countries has increased dramatically in recent years, our next project should be a World Tour theme park with replicas of famous foreign buildings, rides that have international themes, and refreshment stands serving only foods from the country represented by the nearest ride. The best location would be near our capital city, which has large percentages of international residents and of children under the age of 16. Given the advantages of this sit e and the growing interest in foreign countries, the World Tour theme park should be as successful as our Space Travel theme park, where attendance has increased tenfold over the past decade." Discuss how well reasoned . . . Etc.
Author: asdfgh | Date: November 26, 2015 | Score:4.5 | => 5 or 6 Essays, Click Here <=
In the memorandum, it is recommended to build a theme park in the city to attract the people who would otherwise visit foreign counties. this recommendation is following the increase visit to foreign countries. In this argument author predicts that world theme park which replicates national monuments and other things native to foreign countries would increase the attendance of the theme park and hence the plan will be successful. This argument is depending on many unproved assumptions> hence the argument is flawed.
First, the author readily assumes that, constructing a world theme park replicating monuments and delicacies of different countries would attract people who would otherwise visit foreign countries to enjoy above mentioned luxuries. This assumption readily assumes that people usually visit places to enjoy the delicacies and other monuments, though it is partly true, this is not the case with everyone, a majority of people like to visit foreign countries to enjoy the weather and scenic beauty rather than paying a visit to crowed world famous monuments for instance most of the people pay visit to Switzerland just to enjoy the scenic beauty and indulge in adventures that are famous only in that country though company becomes successful in replicating other things it may not be the case with replicating weather and scenic beauty.
Second, author points out the success of space travel theme park where attendance has increased by ten fold in last decade. Here author is trying to establish the causal connection, when none exists. The success of world tour theme park cannot be judged by the success of space travel theme park. No evidence has been given to prove this point. Further more author suggests a place having large number of international residents and kids for the construction of theme park. No evidence has been given on how this choice of place would increase the attendance of the theme park, for instance international residents having lived in foreign land already may not feel like visiting a place that is a mere replication of their native place, even if we agree that people would love to visit theme park, they would not be willing to visit the park again and again leading to decrease in attendance because of all these reasons this recommendation does not look like a sound one.
In conclusion. recommendation to build theme park is not logically convincing, argument would have been strengthened if it had conducted poll and got the opinion of people on whether they would be willing visit this theme park or visit foreign land instead. further author should mention how the success of space theme park is similar to success of world theme park.without answers to all these questions, this argument is not valid.