The following appeared in a health newsletter.
"A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets."
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 author`s argument the government should focus more on the education of the bicycle drivers rather than encouraging them to wear helmets or other safety tools is flawed. In the argument, not only did the author draw the conclusion based on some unwarranted assumptions, but also did not provide some convincing evidence for the fact that more concentration on education will have positive effects. Furthermore, the author leaves some ambiguities in the argument which weakens the argument for the demonstrated conclusion.
To begin with, the conclusion is hinged on the assumption that the using helmet has a major influence in reduction of the serious injuries. The author left this underlying assumption unwarranted, where there should be more evidences regarding the issue. There might be some other factors like the improvements in the bicycles industry causes this decrease in the serious injuries.
Moreover, the arguer also leaves the ambiguity about the other factors may cause the increase in the number of the accidents. She implicitly assumes that the safety feeling, as a result of wearing helmet, is the main reason for the surge in the number of accidents, whilst other factors such quality of the bicycles or road or bike path have no impact on this increase.
The other loophole of the argument is the assumption that the increase in the accident also means the increase in the serious injuries. This assumption could also not be cogent as the number of the accidents caused serious injuries might have reduced in the past ten years, whereas the number of accidents considerably escalated.
The other problem with the arguer`s conclusion could be that she assumes a positive correlation between the education and reduction in the number of serious injuries without providing convincing information or more elaboration about it. This unprovided evidence could weakens the line of reasoning without any statistical references on identical sample or other studies showing such positive relation.
To conclude, the argument could be strengthened if the author provides more information about the underlying causes and effect in the argument (whether they hold or not) and also the correlation between them. The argument, however, in its current form, is not a rigorous for the reasons indicated.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-24 | Technoblade | 58 | view |
| 2023-06-06 | kalp98403 | 16 | view |
| 2023-04-07 | poiuy23567 | 66 | view |
| 2023-03-09 | dxy40747 | 68 | view |
| 2023-02-11 | HSNDEK | 63 | view |
- People's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting 60
- The following appeared in a health newsletter."A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that numbe 16
- A recently issued twenty-year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates. Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 318, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'bicycles'' or 'bicycle's'?
Suggestion: bicycles'; bicycle's
...er factors like the improvements in the bicycles industry causes this decrease in the se...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 274, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'weaken'
Suggestion: weaken
...bout it. This unprovided evidence could weakens the line of reasoning without any stati...
^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 143, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rlying causes and effect in the argument whether they hold or not and also the c...
^^
Line 11, column 169, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n the argument whether they hold or not and also the correlation between them. T...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, whereas, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 16.3942115768 171% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1970.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 366.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3825136612 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37391431897 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86392499031 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467213114754 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 617.4 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.9689614314 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.714285714 119.503703932 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1428571429 23.324526521 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.71428571429 5.70786347227 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0631048101875 0.218282227539 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0237848943415 0.0743258471296 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0307380984966 0.0701772020484 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0337048822553 0.128457276422 26% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0135680455483 0.0628817314937 22% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 14.3799401198 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.3550499002 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.197005988 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.