The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager. “One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one-third of its original flow. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further.”
The writer of this analytical piece has drawn an optimistic conclusion, from disjointed and incomplete data, that putting restrictions on water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase the profit of Sunnyside Corporation. In the support of his position, the writer claims that no complain reported for showers since one month ago showerheads of the first five floor's apartments were modified to restrict the water flow to one-third of its original flow. At first glance, it seems plausible, but in the depth analysis reveals certain logical fallacies.
In the given argument, a major question that needs to answer is that did the reduction in the water pressure of the first five floors reduced water usage? It's likely that due to the reduced pressure in shower people needs more water. Moreover, the writer does not present the information regarding the difference in water reading before and after water flow restriction. It is not feasible to assume that due to less water flow people used less water. Thus, if residents started using more water due to less pressure then the writer's claims fall apart.
Furthermore, even if we assume that the reduction in the water flow of the first five floors reduced water usage and no one complaint about it then also we cannot apply the same for the rest of the floors. The writer needs to answer the question, where is the water tank situated? Because if the water tank is on the terrace then the pressure on the first five floors is naturally more than the upper floors, hence the reduction in the pressure of all the floors may create problems for the upper floors. Moreover, the writer needs to clear that, is there any difference between the water usage habits of all the residents? Maybe the residents of the first five floors are conservative and using water carefully while the other residents are profligate in water usage. Thus, after reducing the water flow it is not guaranteed that it will increase decrease water usage. Therefore, the writer's assumption that the profit will increase proves unwarranted.
All things considering, it may be said that the writer has failed to make a convincing argument because of the complete absence of the evidence needed. The writer needs to answer the questions regarding, the difference in the water usage before and after water flow restriction, the difference in the water usage habit of all the residents, location of the water storage tank to make the argument more promising. However, no convincing reasoning is given. The argument ends with an entirely unjustified optimistic conclusion based on the wishy-washy observation that is likely to be incorrect.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 518, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
...d using more water due to less pressure then the writers claims fall apart. Fur...
^^^^
Line 3, column 554, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ure then the writers claims fall apart. Furthermore, even if we assume that the ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 886, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...se decrease water usage. Therefore, the writers assumption that the profit will increas...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 955, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rofit will increase proves unwarranted. All things considering, it may be said t...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, third, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2251.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 445.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05842696629 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59293186426 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6221012033 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.433707865169 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 709.2 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.611354585 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.473684211 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4210526316 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.10526315789 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
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: 0.28464947921 0.218282227539 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0871720298258 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0918408162801 0.0701772020484 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199373519579 0.128457276422 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.142068755037 0.0628817314937 226% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 518, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
...d using more water due to less pressure then the writers claims fall apart. Fur...
^^^^
Line 3, column 554, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ure then the writers claims fall apart. Furthermore, even if we assume that the ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 886, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...se decrease water usage. Therefore, the writers assumption that the profit will increas...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 955, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rofit will increase proves unwarranted. All things considering, it may be said t...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, third, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2251.0 2260.96107784 100% => OK
No of words: 445.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05842696629 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59293186426 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6221012033 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.433707865169 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 709.2 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.611354585 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.473684211 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4210526316 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.10526315789 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
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: 0.28464947921 0.218282227539 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0871720298258 0.0743258471296 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0918408162801 0.0701772020484 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199373519579 0.128457276422 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.142068755037 0.0628817314937 226% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.