The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper:
“A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer
average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad
located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to
raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should
disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The argument that citizens of the West Cambria should disallowed their volunteer ambulance service by replacing with a commercial one is not entirely logically convincing, because it ignores certain crucial assumptions.
Firstly, the argument assumes that hiring a commercial ambulance service could care patients better than current squad. That assumption based on a comparison between West and East Cambria’s ambulance services but there is no detailed explanation about reasons of why a commercial ambulance squad responded more quickly to accident. Perhaps, East Cambria owns better and faster vehicles than West or there is less traffic in the streets of East Cambria. For Example: Purchasing better and quicker ambulance cars or creating emergency lines in the roads of West Cambria could close the gap between responding times
Secondly, the argument omits that author’s conclusion is based on only one determinant to decide East Cambria’s ambulance service model is better. In order to provide better patient care for victims, the town also has to own better doctors, medical equipment and hospitals, these facts are flawed in Author’s claim. For example: maybe victims is reached hospital later than East Cambria but surgeons of the West Cambria could be better on medical operations which is more important for patient’s health.
Finally, the argument never addresses price gap between public and commercial hospitals. Health is the necessary for humans and it is fact that people are trying to escape from ill-nesses. It is a fact that in the most of industrialized countries, medical care is free and right of citizens to acquire. In most countries, public hospitals serve for their citizens for free or cheaper prices than the commercial ones. There are many suspicious and doubts about qualifications of the commercial hospitals, including ambulance service. The evidence shows that quality of caring in the public hospitals is also better in comparing to commercial hospitals. That’s why demanding additional fee for an ambulance service in the West Cambria would likely face with negative reply by people because it is responsibility of town to provide better service and they pay their taxes to town for better.
Thus argument is not completely sound.
The evidence in support of conclusion, analyzing causes behind time responding time differences between two cities could result by finding all determinants of problems and a solution for problem.
Ultimately, the argument might have been weakened by flaws in the author’s assumption.
- Studying foodwayswhat foods people eat and how they produce, acquire, prepare, and consume them - is the best way to gain deep understanding of a culture. 79
- Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today 50
- If rituals did not exist, we would have to invent them. We need ceremonies and rituals to help us define ourselves socially and culturally. 16
- Some people say that the Internet provides people with a lot of valuable information. Others think access to so much information creates problems. Which view do you agree with? 80
- An idea alone no matter how great is meaningless unless it is put into practice 37
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
...ey pay their taxes to town for better. Thus argument is not completely sound. The ...
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'thus', 'as to', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.306345733042 0.25644967241 119% => OK
Verbs: 0.129102844639 0.15541462614 83% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0919037199125 0.0836205057962 110% => OK
Adverbs: 0.054704595186 0.0520304965353 105% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0175054704595 0.0272364105082 64% => OK
Prepositions: 0.135667396061 0.125424944231 108% => OK
Participles: 0.0393873085339 0.0416121511921 95% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.95099959879 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Infinitives: 0.019693654267 0.026700313972 74% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0700218818381 0.113004496875 62% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0153172866521 0.0255425247493 60% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00656455142232 0.0127820249294 51% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2592.0 2731.13054187 95% => OK
No of words: 397.0 446.07635468 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.52896725441 6.12365571057 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.448362720403 0.378187486979 119% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.36523929471 0.287650121315 127% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.259445843829 0.208842608468 124% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.173803526448 0.135150697306 129% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95099959879 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 207.018472906 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506297229219 0.469332199767 108% => OK
Word variations: 55.5474909345 52.1807786196 106% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 20.039408867 85% => OK
Sentence length: 23.3529411765 23.2022227129 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.9277552315 57.7814097925 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.470588235 141.986410481 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3529411765 23.2022227129 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.764705882353 0.724660767414 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.14285714286 136% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 59.8768706475 51.9672348444 115% => OK
Elegance: 2.39130434783 1.8405768891 130% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.425957096385 0.441005458295 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.137319653414 0.135418324435 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0893925337778 0.0829849096947 108% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.643853343694 0.58762219726 110% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.206799373449 0.147661913831 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.182403407917 0.193483328276 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0793461812106 0.0970749176394 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.215248653758 0.42659136922 50% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.168408178801 0.0774707102158 217% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234642504373 0.312017818177 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112710787159 0.0698173142475 161% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.