The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants.
"Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little impact on our customers. In fact, only about 2 percent of customers have complained, indicating that an average of 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change. Furthermore, many servers have reported that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. Clearly, either these customers do not distinguish butter from margarine or they use the term 'butter' to refer to either butter or margarine."
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The author of the prompt presents some skeletal information as premises for its argument, which I do not find cogent enough. The argument lacks concrete evidence that can bolster its conclusion .The author of this prompt argues that because only 2 percent of its customers complained about its recent replacement of butter with margarine, therefore 98 percent of its customers are happy with this change. Also, it goes on to indicate that, because servers present margarine to customers who request for butter, do not complain, consequentially, they cannot distinguish between butter and margarine, or that they loosely refer to butter as margarine interchangeably.
First of all, it is imperative to highlight that this argument tends to adopt an “either or fallacy”. By this, I mean that the author presents only two options as the only available explanations for the Happy Pancake’s customers’ satisfaction level as regard the replacement of butter with margarine. It is possible that customers do not complain because butter and margarine do not taste very different, thus, they do not see a need to complain when given margarine. In addition, there is the adoption of inductive fallacy. The fact that only 2 percent of customers complained does not mean that 98 people out of 100 are truly happy with the change because we are not given the total number of customers the restaurant typically has on a good day. Correspondingly, the author needs to substantiate the argument with evidence of a survey that shows the total number of customer they had, prior to the change, and the customers they had after the change, in order to identify, if truly there was a little impact. Better still, a survey that determines the satisfaction level of the customers can also validate this argument.
Alternatively, as opposed to the customers not knowing the difference between butter and margarine, it could also be that the customers of Happy Pancake do not complain when they are given margarine, because margarine is healthier than butter, in the assumption that they are indeed happy with the change. Also, it could be that they did not see a compelling reason to complain about the change. However, this does not insinuate that they are happy with the change because rather than complain they can just as well stop patronizing Happy Pancakes and visit other similar restaurants.
In conclusion, the argument is replete with illogical reasoning, due to the absence of some very pertinent information that could have made the argument more compelling.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-20 | Krishna Prasad | 46 | view |
| 2019-09-10 | orlando23 | 59 | view |
| 2019-07-30 | Amin Beheshti | 72 | view |
| 2019-03-09 | adhgna@gmail.com | 77 | view |
| 2018-11-24 | julls.kl | 72 | view |
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants."Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little i 58
- The effectiveness of a country's leaders is best measured by examining the well-being of that country's citizens.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 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
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants."Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little i 50
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants."Recently, butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States. This change, however, has had little im 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 194, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...evidence that can bolster its conclusion .The author of this prompt argues that be...
^^
Line 1, column 196, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...idence that can bolster its conclusion .The author of this prompt argues that becau...
^^^
Line 1, column 196, 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.
...idence that can bolster its conclusion .The author of this prompt argues that becau...
^^^
Line 3, column 1145, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tomers can also validate this argument. Alternatively, as opposed to the custome...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'thus', 'well', 'i mean', 'in addition', 'in conclusion', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.216560509554 0.25644967241 84% => OK
Verbs: 0.150743099788 0.15541462614 97% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0636942675159 0.0836205057962 76% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0870488322718 0.0520304965353 167% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0488322717622 0.0272364105082 179% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.138004246285 0.125424944231 110% => OK
Participles: 0.0169851380042 0.0416121511921 41% => Some participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 2.96354261451 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0254777070064 0.026700313972 95% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0976645435244 0.113004496875 86% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0148619957537 0.0255425247493 58% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0169851380042 0.0127820249294 133% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2578.0 2731.13054187 94% => OK
No of words: 416.0 446.07635468 93% => OK
Chars per words: 6.19711538462 6.12365571057 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.367788461538 0.378187486979 97% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.295673076923 0.287650121315 103% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.21875 0.208842608468 105% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.158653846154 0.135150697306 117% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96354261451 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 207.018472906 90% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449519230769 0.469332199767 96% => OK
Word variations: 48.4383158692 52.1807786196 93% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.039408867 70% => OK
Sentence length: 29.7142857143 23.2022227129 128% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.5172216775 57.7814097925 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 184.142857143 141.986410481 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.7142857143 23.2022227129 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.0 0.724660767414 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 59.2815934066 51.9672348444 114% => OK
Elegance: 1.2962962963 1.8405768891 70% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32358780963 0.441005458295 73% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.163764314252 0.135418324435 121% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0887855374856 0.0829849096947 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.602485398571 0.58762219726 103% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.188381768591 0.147661913831 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157852617034 0.193483328276 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0773355702601 0.0970749176394 80% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.468290555418 0.42659136922 110% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.157551603873 0.0774707102158 203% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.229832038568 0.312017818177 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0674619624005 0.0698173142475 97% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.87684729064 58% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 3.0 5.36822660099 56% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 10.0 14.657635468 68% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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: 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.