The following was excerpted from the speech of a spokesperson for Synthetic Farm Products, Inc. “Many farmers who invested in the equipment needed to make the switch from synthetic to organic fertilizers and pesticides feel that it would be too expensive
The argument claims that farmers switched to invest in organic fertilizers and pesticides from synthetic because synthetic farming was expensive. But now a study shows that organic farming yields low crops, even though organic investment is low compared with that of scientific. The argument states that the switch has been unwise and it was actually a motivation for environment and not for economic concerns. Here, the argument manipulates the facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.
Firstly, the argument readily assumes that the loss from low crop yields is due to switching from synthetic to organic fertilizers and pesticides. The low crop yield could be due to many reasons and the farming depends on many factors which have not been cited by the author. One reason which could be possible is that the climate when the crops were sown was not perfect for the crops. Some crops require specific kind of climate to grow, and the crops might have been damaged due to the climate, resulting n low yields. Another reason might be poor farming techniques which resulted in low crop yield. Therefore, shifting from synthetic farming to organic farming might not be the reason of low yields.
Secondly, the argument stated that choosing organic farming was unwise in terms of financial investment and states that it was motivated by environment concerns. This is again a weak and unsupported claim as the argument demonstrates an unusual relationship between financial investment and environment concerns. The argument could have been strengthened if the author had given any examples citing the relationship between environment concerns and financial status of the farmer. Without unconvincing answers to the questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could have been considerably strengthened if the author had given any reasons of shifting to organic farming. Without much information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2011-11-13 | thakur.shikha1@gmail.com | 80 | view |
- 83
- The following appeared as part of a campaign to sell advertising time on a local radio station to local businesses. “The Cumquat Café began advertising on our local radio station this year and was delighted to see its business increase by 10 percent over 80
- 93
- “In this age of automation, many people complain that humans are becoming subservient to machines. But, in fact, machines are continually improving our lives.” 93
- The following appeared as part of a newspaper editorial. “Two years ago Nova High School began to use interactive computer instruction in three academic subjects. The school dropout rate declined immediately, and last year’s graduates have reported some i 90
Comments
Well, you got 5.0 out of
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
Total:
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 349 350
No. of Characters: 1816 1500
No. of Different Words: 156 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.322 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.203 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.768 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 141 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 74 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.389 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 4.957 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.556 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.36 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.546 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
rate this one please...