“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
Citing a case where an organization of a dractically different industry was able to minimize the costs and maximize profit, the author makes a sweeping conclusion of similar gains in completely different industry. Stated this way, the argument manipulates the facts to jump to conclusion without providing any valid assumption for such a remark. The argument also states that the time taken for his/her industry to improve its organizational efficiencies is going to be similar to another industry without drawing any parallel and hence not providing any real basis for such conclusion. This argument, the way it is presented, is flawed.
Firstly, the argument fails to mention the parallels between the processing of films and processing of food. To be able to cogently conclude that the metrics of improvements from one industry can be applied to another, one needs to be able to draw measurable, strict parallels. The argument does not talk about what kind of processing in film industry was improved over time. This makes the argument weak. For example, if the main driver of decreased costs was the improved safety from one of the harmful chemicals that is used while creating a film and the food processing industry does not even use that chemical, then the argument is weakened and hence the argument does not hold true. On the other hand, if the driver of decreased cost for film industry was an automation which is now available for all industries then, the author can make such assumptions. Overall, we do not have enough information for such a remark.
Secondly, the author mentions an industry in a different time. Whereas even comparing two different industries for a particular process improvement makes the argument look weak, comparing them at two completely different periods of time makes the argument further weaker. The argument does not provide any information on what type of process improvement revolutions really happened between 1970 to 1984. Was there an industrial robotics revolution which, although helped film industry, cannot help food processing industry because they are already using the latest processing optimization with respect to automations.
Thirdly, the author is extremely vague on what constitutes minimization of costs and maximization of profits. On one hand the author makes sweeping comparisons, and on the other he/she fails to provide any details on what the terms mean. If the author is expecting improvements similar to film industry, that is one thing we can critically analyze. However, if only 10% of film industry's profit improvments are enough to constitute successful improvements for the author, then that becomes a different puzzle to solve.
Overall, more context is needed if we are to determine if such a drastic comparison is possible. When information about the type of processing that is being talked about, the time frame when such processing improvements are expected is mentioned and a better metric on the expected cost minimization and profit maximization metrics is provided, the argument would have a better chance of standing against the multitudes of critical questions being thrown at it.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-27 | navderm | 82 | view |
| 2019-09-07 | glaedr7274 | 63 | view |
| 2019-03-26 | HayHAHA | 68 | view |
| 2018-12-11 | gomoros | 66 | view |
| 2018-12-04 | Naga Goutam | 53 | view |
- “In a recent citywide poll, fifteen percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago. During these past five years, the number of people visiting our city’s art 55
- The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city s council on the arts In a recent citywide poll 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago Dur 73
- The following appeared in a memorandum issued by a large city s council on the arts In a recent citywide poll 15 percent more residents said that they watch television programs about the visual arts than was the case in a poll conducted five years ago Dur 73
- The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best w 77
- “Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 82
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 508 350
No. of Characters: 2608 1500
No. of Different Words: 229 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.748 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.134 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.852 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 195 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 160 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 121 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 74 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.19 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.76 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.619 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.33 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.526 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.144 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Manipulates
...dustry. Stated this way, the argument manipulates the facts to jump to conclusion without...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 115, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sumption for such a remark. The argument also states that the time taken for his/...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: also,
...tion for such a remark. The argument also states that the time taken for his/her ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 122, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...l efficiencies is going to be similar to another industry without drawing any par...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Another
...ficiencies is going to be similar to another industry without drawing any parallel a...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 129, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... such conclusion. This argument, the way it is presented, is flawed. Firstl...
^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...h conclusion. This argument, the way it is presented, is flawed. Firstly,...
^^
Line 17, column 135, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ds to be able to draw measurable, strict parallels. The argument does not talk ab...
^^^^
Line 19, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Parallels
...o be able to draw measurable, strict parallels. The argument does not talk about what ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 133, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...roved over time. This makes the argument weak. For example, if the main driver of...
^^^^
Line 21, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Weak
...d over time. This makes the argument weak. For example, if the main driver of dec...
^^^^
Line 23, column 135, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ument is weakened and hence the argument does not hold true. On the other hand, i...
^^^^
Line 25, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Does
...t is weakened and hence the argument does not hold true. On the other hand, if th...
^^^^
Line 25, column 130, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...was an automation which is now available for all industries then, the author can ...
^^^^
Line 27, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: For
...an automation which is now available for all industries then, the author can mak...
^^^
Line 31, column 128, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...wo different industries for a particular process improvement makes the argument l...
^^^^
Line 35, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Further
...nt periods of time makes the argument further weaker. The argument does not provide a...
^^^^^^^
Line 35, column 142, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...olutions really happened between 1970 to 1984. Was there an industrial robotics r...
^^^^
Line 37, column 138, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lp food processing industry because they are already using the latest processing ...
^^^^
Line 39, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Are
...ood processing industry because they are already using the latest processing opt...
^^^
Line 43, column 133, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ation of profits. On one hand the author makes sweeping comparisons, and on the o...
^^^^
Line 45, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Makes
...n of profits. On one hand the author makes sweeping comparisons, and on the other ...
^^^^^
Line 45, column 106, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ide any details on what the terms mean. If the author is expecting improvements...
^^
Line 45, column 132, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e terms mean. If the author is expecting improvements similar to film industry, t...
^^^^
Line 47, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Improvements
...rms mean. If the author is expecting improvements similar to film industry, that is one t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 49, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Are
... of film industrys profit improvments are enough to constitute successful improve...
^^^
Line 53, column 98, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “When” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... such a drastic comparison is possible. When information about the type of proces...
^^^^
Line 53, column 120, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ison is possible. When information about the type of processing that is being tal...
^^^^
Line 55, column 126, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g improvements are expected is mentioned and a better metric on the expected cost...
^^^^
Line 57, column 132, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ovided, the argument would have a better chance of standing against the multitude...
^^^^
Line 59, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Chance
...ed, the argument would have a better chance of standing against the multitudes of c...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, however, if, look, really, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, whereas, while, for example, kind of, such as, with respect to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2745.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 506.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42490118577 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7428307748 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90226862108 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466403162055 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 841.5 705.55239521 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.2990509474 57.8364921388 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.714285714 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0952380952 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.61904761905 5.70786347227 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 26.0 5.15768463074 504% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 31.0 5.25449101796 590% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162171466852 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.053529688773 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.033681828699 0.0701772020484 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0510579674661 0.128457276422 40% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0333061990157 0.0628817314937 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.3799401198 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.