In a lab study of 2 different industrial cleansers, CleanAll was found to remove 40% more dirt and kill 30% more bacteria than the next best cleanser. Furthermore, a study showed that employees working at buildings cleaned with CleanAll used far fewer sick days than employees working at buildings cleaned with other cleansers. Therefore, to prevent employee illness, all companies should use CleanAll as their industrial cleanser.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The writer of this claim having gone through a lab study of two industrial cleansers lays certain vague assumptions about industrial cleaning. He posits that a cleanser named Clean All is more effective than other industrial cleansers as it removes 40% more dirt and 30% more bacteria than the next best cleanser and as such should be used by all companies. This generalization is faulty and would be contested briefly in the succeeding paragraphs.
Though Clean All can be said to have efficient cleansing ability, it still remains absurd to think that a study of just two industrial cleansers would be sufficient to hold such a conclusion. What if they were several other cleansers that had better purifying properties other than Clean All and the unnamed other? What if a certain industrial company secretly uses a more potent cleanser and by the aid of the government restricts this cleanser from getting to other industrial companies. Did the writer ever consider that the two industrial cleansers that were studied were used primarily by just a percentage of labs clustered in the small city of Manitoba and therefore isn't sufficient to represent the total usage of other cities. How consistent were the results? Could the cleanser remove exactly 40% more dirt and 30% more bacterial year long? Were the dirt all of the same kind or was the cleanser just useful for cleansing a particular oil stain. This claim engenders a whole lot of questions left unanswered.
Furthermore the writer believes that Clean All should be used by all companies as a means of preventing employee illnesses. He corroborates his statement by laying emphasis about companies that uses Clean All as their industrial cleanser having employees with far fewer sick leaves. This claim can be made faulty as it’s very likely that employees in this company actually report just very few cases of their illnesses as reporting these cases could make the company relieve them of their duties barring their recovery and as such impart negatively on their salaries. Thus they are less likely to be sincere with their health thereby reporting lesser cases than expected.
Additionally, the writer seems so concerned about making his notion more appealing than taking note of crucial details. If not so, the writer should be aware of the recent publication of the nation's most reputable news network about how an indigenous leading company in the country struck a deal on supplies of organic cleansers from a neighboring nation. The most striking thing about this deal is that it was initiated by a company known for utilizing Clean All cleansers for decades. It leaves us really puzzled and with a lot of boxes to tick. Is it really possible for a big playmaker in the industry to invest in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that effective ? Could it be that the cleanser though previously used for it’s effectiveness before now had now been less effective therefore companies investing in other cleansers? Could it also be that the acclaimed lab results was disingenuous and was made to be biased in order to save a potential sales decline situation?
Conclusively, the writer should work more on providing evidential supports on subsequent positions especially when it concerns a large population rather than relying on mere assumptions or inconclusive data.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 675, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...he small city of Manitoba and therefore isnt sufficient to represent the total usage...
^^^^
Line 4, column 866, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...more bacterial year long? Were the dirt all of the same kind or was the cleanser just usef...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 980, Rule ID: WHOLE_LOT[1]
Message: Use simply 'lot'.
Suggestion: lot
...cular oil stain. This claim engenders a whole lot of questions left unanswered. Furthe...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...le lot of questions left unanswered. Furthermore the writer believes that Clean All shou...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 316, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...leaves. This claim can be made faulty as it’s very likely that employees in this ...
^^
Line 6, column 570, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ch impart negatively on their salaries. Thus they are less likely to be sincere with...
^^^^
Line 8, column 644, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...ry to invest in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that ef...
^
Line 8, column 644, Rule ID: NO_SPACE_CLOSING_QUOTE[1]
Message: There should be a space after a closing quote.
Suggestion: ” glorious
...ry to invest in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that effective ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 653, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...est in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that effective ?...
^
Line 8, column 748, Rule ID: FOR_ITS_NN[24]
Message: Did you mean 'for its effectiveness'?
Suggestion: for its effectiveness
...hat the cleanser though previously used for it’s effectiveness before now had now been less effective ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 748, Rule ID: ABOUT_ITS_NN[25]
Message: Did you mean 'for its effectiveness'?
Suggestion: for its effectiveness
...hat the cleanser though previously used for it’s effectiveness before now had now been less effective ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 962, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...us and was made to be biased in order to save a potential sales decline situation...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, briefly, furthermore, if, really, so, still, therefore, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2824.0 2260.96107784 125% => OK
No of words: 553.0 441.139720559 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10669077758 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76310812599 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 204.123752495 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482820976492 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 852.3 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.4928880642 57.8364921388 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.782608696 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0434782609 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.30434782609 5.70786347227 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 12.0 5.25449101796 228% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.319548379705 0.218282227539 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0984558003721 0.0743258471296 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0910464820331 0.0701772020484 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188058473347 0.128457276422 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101531066256 0.0628817314937 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 98.500998004 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 675, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...he small city of Manitoba and therefore isnt sufficient to represent the total usage...
^^^^
Line 4, column 866, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...more bacterial year long? Were the dirt all of the same kind or was the cleanser just usef...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 980, Rule ID: WHOLE_LOT[1]
Message: Use simply 'lot'.
Suggestion: lot
...cular oil stain. This claim engenders a whole lot of questions left unanswered. Furthe...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
...le lot of questions left unanswered. Furthermore the writer believes that Clean All shou...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 316, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...leaves. This claim can be made faulty as it’s very likely that employees in this ...
^^
Line 6, column 570, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ch impart negatively on their salaries. Thus they are less likely to be sincere with...
^^^^
Line 8, column 644, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...ry to invest in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that ef...
^
Line 8, column 644, Rule ID: NO_SPACE_CLOSING_QUOTE[1]
Message: There should be a space after a closing quote.
Suggestion: ” glorious
...ry to invest in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that effective ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 653, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...est in another cleanser if the ”glorious” Clean All cleanser was that effective ?...
^
Line 8, column 748, Rule ID: FOR_ITS_NN[24]
Message: Did you mean 'for its effectiveness'?
Suggestion: for its effectiveness
...hat the cleanser though previously used for it’s effectiveness before now had now been less effective ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 748, Rule ID: ABOUT_ITS_NN[25]
Message: Did you mean 'for its effectiveness'?
Suggestion: for its effectiveness
...hat the cleanser though previously used for it’s effectiveness before now had now been less effective ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 962, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...us and was made to be biased in order to save a potential sales decline situation...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, briefly, furthermore, if, really, so, still, therefore, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2824.0 2260.96107784 125% => OK
No of words: 553.0 441.139720559 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10669077758 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76310812599 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 204.123752495 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482820976492 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 852.3 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.4928880642 57.8364921388 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.782608696 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0434782609 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.30434782609 5.70786347227 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 12.0 5.25449101796 228% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.319548379705 0.218282227539 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0984558003721 0.0743258471296 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0910464820331 0.0701772020484 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188058473347 0.128457276422 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101531066256 0.0628817314937 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 98.500998004 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.