"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
The author of the argument asserts that Balmer Island higher-ups should set a limitation on the number of mopeds rental to dwindle the number of accident, occurred between mopeds and pedestrian. Although the author’s argument seems to be tenable and rational at first glance, more scrutiny shed light to its weakness, and it turns out to be untenable as it rests on a number premises all of which could be challenged or questioned in one way or another.
The first question that comes to mind is that, whether it comes from careless pedestrian? If so, it does not matter enforcing restraints on mopeds or not. In other words, the problem arouses from the other cause, and limiting the number of mopeds could not be effective. For example, it would be better if the town council increase the number of cautious signs in order to preclude this prospect.
The second fault with author’s argument is that, whether the Seaville’s accident reduction is strictly tantamount to decreasing the mopeds or not? If not, maybe the higher-ups of Seaville town take another policy to prevent such accidents. For example, perhaps they have provided a specific route for mopeds, and its aftermath had been such a reducing in the number of accidents.
The last but not least reason to challenge the author’s argument is that the author assumed the reduction measure strictly would be 50 percent. Whether this strict quantity comes from speculation and profound study or imitates Seaville’s reduction quantity? If it is just an imitation, it will better not to be considered. Determining such percentages and quantities are merely is commensurate with the population and structure of a region and can be influenced by people’s loyalty to law. So the number of factors could play the role and should be considered to calculate such a quantity.
Having scrutinized all the premises, plausible conclusion that can be drawn is that the author’s conclusion that enforcing limitation on the number of mopeds that are rented by the rental companies seems untenable as there is a number of question, having been ignored by the author while the answer of could add to the logic of each premise.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not OK. it works for A, while it may not work for B.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 362 350
No. of Characters: 1771 1500
No. of Different Words: 176 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.362 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.892 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.653 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 141 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 102 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.133 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.398 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.334 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.037 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 14, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[3]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'not the least'.
Suggestion: not the least
... the number of accidents. The last but not least reason to challenge the author's a...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, second, so, while, for example, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1846.0 2260.96107784 82% => OK
No of words: 362.0 441.139720559 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09944751381 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.36191444098 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93018798856 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505524861878 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 560.7 705.55239521 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.3828923448 57.8364921388 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.066666667 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1333333333 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.46666666667 5.70786347227 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.188227829688 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0646684573945 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655586805084 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109025564076 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0396612286838 0.0628817314937 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 98.500998004 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.