Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within that group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, the statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.
The argument suggests that protective gear will reduce the risk of injury for roller skaters because 75 percent of accidents were observed to be involving roller skaters with no protective equipment. This argument is found to be flawed in various ways, among which three stand out the most.
First, the argument assumes 75% to be a significant number. While 75% of 5,000 accidents is quite horrendous, two out of three injuries also entails the same result. Threrefore, the argument should put the statistic in perspective in terms of magnitude. Moreover, the benchmark needs to be defined as well. 75% might be a horrific indicator in some areas while it could be deemed acceptable in some others. For instance,
Second, the argument assumes that lack of protective gear is the only factor contributing to the injuries. Domain knowledge confirms that people excercise varying degrees of care depending on their risk tolerance. For this reason, some people tend to show more dangerous habits and behaviour while roller skating. And this is true of any sport in general. The argument fails to account for the changes among different individuals and hinges on protective gear as the only contributing factor to the reported injuries.
Last but not least, the argument concludes with a vague statement asserting that high-quality gear would greatly reduce the risk of svere injury. First of all, the report did not bring any mention of the gear quality; That is, the statistics merely indicate that people without gear are more susciptible to injuries and it does not necessarily distinguish between low-quality and high-quality gear. Second, what do we mean by greatly reduce? How great is great? Does a few percentage point reduction substantiate a big reduction in risk? What do we mean by risk to begin with? Third, the word severe needs definition as well. Is a small cut categorized in the same group as a fatality?
In summary, the argument presented was found to be weak and flawed due to various reasons detailed above, hence, it fails to establish a convincing tone in drawing its conclusion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-09-28 | mahig2808@gmail.com | 60 | view |
- Claim: Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed.Reason: It is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—to use public resources to fund the arts when people's basic needs a 66
- The statement claims cooperation rather than competition to be the more important trait to inculcate in young people in developing them for leadership positions. 50
- The arguement blames insufficient and ineffective marketing to be the culprit for the decline in the number of movie goers observed during the past year and makes a reccomendation to allocate more budget to marketing efforts as a consequence. 66
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 66
- Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment Within that group of people 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wear 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...5 percent of accidents were observed to be involving roller skaters with no protective equip...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 272, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'stand' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'stands'.
Suggestion: stands
...awed in various ways, among which three stand out the most. First, the argument as...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 110, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... of 5,000 accidents is quite horrendous, two out of three injuries also entails t...
^^
Line 3, column 422, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...acceptable in some others. For instance, Second, the argument assumes that lack o...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, moreover, second, so, third, well, while, for instance, in general, in summary, first of all, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1768.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 346.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1098265896 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75850965597 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.554913294798 0.468620217663 118% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 3.0 0.471057884232 637% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5896990474 57.8364921388 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.1904761905 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4761904762 23.324526521 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.47619047619 5.70786347227 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.139108152467 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0373045773214 0.0743258471296 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394558625474 0.0701772020484 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0735193943887 0.128457276422 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0442545797985 0.0628817314937 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 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% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 12.06 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => Gunning_fog is low.
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.