Airline industry representatives have recently argued that flying is safer than driving, citing two separate
studies. First, US statistics show that each year there are approximately 40,000 deaths in automobile
accidents versus only approximately 200 in flight accidents. Second, studies indicate that pilots are four
times less likely than average to have accidents on the road.Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to determine
whether the argument is reasonable. Be sure to explain what effects the answers to these questions would
have on the validity of the argument.
The author of the passage contends that flying is safer than driving. In order to determine whether the argument is reasonable, some questions must be answered. First of all, the author deals with absolute numbers rather than proportions. Secondly, he does not give any authenticity of his study. Finally, the author makes a very vague relation between pilots are better drivers on average so they must be better fliers. The argument may seem coherent at first glance, however, upon scrutiny, the argument appears seriously flawed based on questionable assumptions.
The author compares 40000 deaths in the automobile with 200 flight accidents. This comparison shows that a total number of deaths are more in the automobile but does not tell us what is the death proportionally to the total number of the passengers. For instance, if only 200 passengers are traveling by flight, then traveling by flight does not seem safer. To make the argument more reasonable the author must compare the proportions rather than the absolute numbers otherwise the argument remains flawed.
The author should tell about the sample size of the study, how it was conducted, was there any control group. For instance, if the study picked up a sample which does not represent the population the argument remains on questionable grounds. Further, the statistics are given of only US but we all know that air routes contain airplanes from the world. It would be wise to validate all the assumptions before proceeding to a conclusion.
The most questionable statement in the argument was that the author trying to infer that since pilots are four times less likely than average to have accidents on the road. This comparison is not logical at all and thus questionable. For instance, a shark which is an excellent swimmer is not an excellent flier. In fact, it can't fly at all. Therefore, the author must rectify his statement to make his argument more reasonable.
Evidently, the author has not thought things through. He has should have checked the authenticity of the study before concluding. The comparison he has made that pilots are the better driver, so they are better flier is baseless and is questionable. Finally, the proportion of deaths should be given rather than absolute numbers to make more sense from the data. Without these changes, speakers argument that flying is safer than driving remains questionable and thus unconvincing.
- Leaders are created primarily by the demands that are placed upon them. 50
- Claim: In order to help small businesses thrive, government should play a minimal role in private businessmatters. 66
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you a 50
- Airline industry representatives have recently argued that flying is safer than driving, citing two separatestudies. First, US statistics show that each year there are approximately 40,000 deaths in automobileaccidents versus only approximately 200 in fli 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...wed based on questionable assumptions. The author compares 40000 deaths in the ...
^^^
Line 7, column 326, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... is not an excellent flier. In fact, it cant fly at all. Therefore, the author must ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 326, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'cants'?
Suggestion: cants
... is not an excellent flier. In fact, it cant fly at all. Therefore, the author must ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, for instance, in fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2040.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 397.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13853904282 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75313824404 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.486146095718 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 621.9 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.2678835197 57.8364921388 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.0 119.503703932 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5416666667 23.324526521 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95833333333 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.12465410254 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0391321745995 0.0743258471296 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0486344591901 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0726422572223 0.128457276422 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.02194538151 0.0628817314937 35% => 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: 11.0 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.77 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 98.500998004 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.