The following appeared in a letter to the editor of theBalmer Island Gazette.
"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author of the argument has failed to convince us that by lowering the number of mopeds in Balmer Island, it is possible to lower the number of accident. The argument, as it stands, is based on questionable assumptions and a faulty line of reasoning, a fact that renders it over-simplistic and unconvincing.
To begin with, the author draws a cause and effect relationship between the number of mopeds in the Balmer Island and the number of accidents. To elucidate on, the direct nexus between the two is falsely assumed. Simply put, the author failed to take into account other factors that could play a role. What if accidents were caused by imprudent and careless drivers. What if the road surface was not of good material that could cause frustration and anxiety for drivers? Not to mention the mere fact that if the pedestrians’ walkway is separated from the mopeds roadway, the risk of such accident would approach to zero. In a nutshell, the author falsely assumes that the only cause for the accidents is the number of vehicles. At last, If the author had enumerated the mentioned evidence and factors the argument would have been stronger.
Next, the arguer suggests that due to the fact that the Island of Seaville had gone through a similar condition and had used the reduction of number of mopeds, as the solution, a year ago, the Isalnd of Balmer has to concede the similar solution. Forgetting to take into account that things change after time and the fact that apples are not oranges, the author uses the Seaville example to convince the reader. What if the Seaville Island had legislated new rules too? What if the drivers had to go through to a whole another different type of qualification before getting and driver’s license? What if the pedestrians, peoples, also helped along the path, for instance, took precautions, to reduce the probability of accidents. Moreover, the author is comparing Seaville Island’s solution after one year. To scrutinize, so many things could have changed in one year. Maybe even the Seaville society is looking for a new way to reduce the number of accidents, just because of the fact that the last one was far from useless. Above all, the author fails to consider other factors that could play a role and the fact that things change over time. If the argument had included what has been mentioned above, it would have been more strengthened.
To conclude, based on substantial assumption and poor evidence, the arguer’s reasoning does not provide concrete support for his/her conclusion. If the argument had included the items discussed, it would have been more thorough and convincing.
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
- a nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.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 t 54
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 62
- The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal."A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situ 50
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 561, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'mopeds'' or 'moped's'?
Suggestion: mopeds'; moped's
...ans' walkway is separated from the mopeds roadway, the risk of such accident woul...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 602, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...fore getting and driver's license? What if the pedestrians, peoples, also helpe...
^^^^
Line 5, column 977, Rule ID: BECAUSE_OF_THE_FACT_THAT[1]
Message: This phrase is redundant. Use simply 'because'.
Suggestion: because
...to reduce the number of accidents, just because of the fact that the last one was far from useless. Abov...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'then', 'as to', 'for instance', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.24609375 0.25644967241 96% => OK
Verbs: 0.166015625 0.15541462614 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0625 0.0836205057962 75% => OK
Adverbs: 0.029296875 0.0520304965353 56% => OK
Pronouns: 0.01171875 0.0272364105082 43% => OK
Prepositions: 0.134765625 0.125424944231 107% => OK
Participles: 0.048828125 0.0416121511921 117% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.75543658453 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.03515625 0.026700313972 132% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.125 0.113004496875 111% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.015625 0.0255425247493 61% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.01953125 0.0127820249294 153% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2669.0 2731.13054187 98% => OK
No of words: 447.0 446.07635468 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97091722595 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.57801047555 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.364653243848 0.378187486979 96% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.266219239374 0.287650121315 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.187919463087 0.208842608468 90% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.114093959732 0.135150697306 84% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75543658453 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 207.018472906 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474272930649 0.469332199767 101% => OK
Word variations: 52.9157043233 52.1807786196 101% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.039408867 110% => OK
Sentence length: 20.3181818182 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.417086365 57.7814097925 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.318181818 141.986410481 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3181818182 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.454545454545 0.724660767414 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.58251231527 84% => OK
Readability: 46.9401057555 51.9672348444 90% => OK
Elegance: 2.07547169811 1.8405768891 113% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.555131122915 0.441005458295 126% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.113291307146 0.135418324435 84% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0626664645913 0.0829849096947 76% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.554424593811 0.58762219726 94% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.175635721099 0.147661913831 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.250006620015 0.193483328276 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.148371696965 0.0970749176394 153% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.559457637507 0.42659136922 131% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.154473199678 0.0774707102158 199% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.417938397314 0.312017818177 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.123429067461 0.0698173142475 177% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.87684729064 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 11.0 5.36822660099 205% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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: This is not the final score. 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.