Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in area where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small posibility that a person will die as a result of inoculations, we can not permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or streanthen the argument.
Here the author tries to make a conclusion on whether innocution against cow flu should be routinely administered or not. But author can't convience the reader as the statements used to evaluate the situation themselves are ambiguous. Hence the passage as whole also becomes flawed and bagged with absurd arguments.
First major flaw of the argument can be observed when the the author suggest to routinely administer the inocutions in the areas where the disease is detect. Really? I mean which type of diesease is author talking about? And what inocution against cow flu has to do with that particular diesease? This statement created a very big flaw in order to reach any conclusion based on the passage as the author fails to suggest any types of clues or hints about the disease and directly concludes that inoculatioin is the remedy.
Secondly, in the reason of not permitting the inoculation author states that there's a small possibility of a person will die as a result of the inoculations. Again, which type of inoculation? Is there anything related to inoculation against cow flu? How often the inoculations will occur? No such information can be inferred from the given information. The author again was clumsy and reached the final obnoxious conclusion about the inoculations.
Also the lanuage used throughout the passage is quite vague and not confined. The words "many", "migh be saved", "small" creates rival context to each other. In the first statement it is read that "many lives might be saved" there is not certain reliability of inoculation results, the lives might be saved might not be. Also in the next statements the line "there's a small posibility that a person..." can't give the adequate information to obviate the innoculation as the population, scenario, health information of the undergone persons etc. is not given.
The argument can be strenthen if the type of disease would be specified for which the regular inoculations against cow flu could be a blessing. Also, the certainity of the results of these inoculations and death rates would strength the argument to reach the conclusion.
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in area where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small posibility that a person will die as a result of inoculations, we can not permit ino 30
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to the employees, sych consultants would be unnecessary.Write a response in which you discuss the 50
- An ailing patient should have easy access to his or her doctor’s record of treating similarly afflicted patients. Through gaining such access, the ailing patient may better determine whether the doctor is competent to treat that medical condition.
- The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land 60
- Do you agree or disagree the following statement?Younger people enjoy life more than older people do. 70
where the disease is detect.
where the disease is detected.
Sentence: Here the author tries to make a conclusion on whether innocution against cow flu should be routinely administered or not.
Error: innocution Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: But author can't convience the reader as the statements used to evaluate the situation themselves are ambiguous.
Error: convience Suggestion: convince
Sentence: First major flaw of the argument can be observed when the the author suggest to routinely administer the inocutions in the areas where the disease is detect.
Error: inocutions Suggestion: inductions
Sentence: I mean which type of diesease is author talking about?
Error: diesease Suggestion: disease
Sentence: And what inocution against cow flu has to do with that particular diesease?
Error: diesease Suggestion: disease
Error: inocution Suggestion: induction
Sentence: This statement created a very big flaw in order to reach any conclusion based on the passage as the author fails to suggest any types of clues or hints about the disease and directly concludes that inoculatioin is the remedy.
Error: inoculatioin Suggestion: incubation
Sentence: Also the lanuage used throughout the passage is quite vague and not confined.
Error: lanuage Suggestion: language
Sentence: The words 'many', 'migh be saved', 'small' creates rival context to each other.
Error: migh Suggestion: might
Sentence: Also in the next statements the line 'there's a small posibility that a person...' can't give the adequate information to obviate the innoculation as the population, scenario, health information of the undergone persons etc. is not given.
Error: posibility Suggestion: possibility
Error: innoculation Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: The argument can be strenthen if the type of disease would be specified for which the regular inoculations against cow flu could be a blessing.
Error: strenthen Suggestion: strengthen
Sentence: Also, the certainity of the results of these inoculations and death rates would strength the argument to reach the conclusion.
Error: certainity Suggestion: certainty
-------------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
flaws:
In GRE/GMAT, we have to accept all data or evidence are true. We can't cast doubt on the words like "many", "might be saved", "small". or something like 'which type of disease'. They are not loopholes.
read samples:
http://www.testbig.com/essays-list?keys=inoculations+&term_node_tid_dep…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 14 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 349 350
No. of Characters: 1731 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.322 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.96 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.76 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 117 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 93 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.45 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.264 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.55 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.279 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.504 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.037 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5