"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 concludes that to reduce number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council should limit number of mopeds rented by island’s moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during summer season because Seaville enforced similar limits on moped rentals last year and it attained 50% annual reduction in moped accidents. The author’s line of reasoning is that by limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50% annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year by neighboring island of Seaville when it had enforced similar limits on moped rentals. This argument is not convincing for various reasons.
First of all, the conclusion that limiting number of moped rentals will reduce number of accidents by 50% annually is based on the questionable assumption that mopeds are only available on rental basis in Balmer Island. However, it is entirely possible that mopeds are also available on sale and that mopeds on sale will increase when rentals have these limits and hence moped accidents won’t reduce significantly. Also, there isn't any proof justifying that enforcing these limits would reduce accidents by exactly 50%. Thus, author’s generalization is unreliable.
Secondly, the author assumes that reducing number of mopeds rented was the dominating reason for the 50% annual reduction in moped accidents in Seaville last year. It is possible that there were other dominating reasons for the reduction in no. of moped accidents last year in Seaville. If this was true, there wouldn't be any change in number of moped accidents in Balmer Island even if the limits on rentals are enforced.
Thirdly, even if this is true, the author assumes that most of the accidents happen only in summer. It is possible that majority of accidents might be happening in other seasons irrespective of the population present at that time. This can lead to the reduction in number of accidents being insignificant by enforcing the limits on moped rentals.
Finally, the author uses a Wrong Comparison flaw. It is a flaw where 2 things which differ in important respects are compared and treated as if they do not differ. The author assumes that what will work in Seaville will work in Balmer Island too. He neglects the fact that the conditions and reasons for accidents in Seaville and Balmer Island might be totally different. Hence, author’s argument is flawed.
In conclusion, to strengthen the argument, the author must provide enough evidence to support the assumption that reducing number of mopeds rented was the only dominating reason for reduction in number of moped accidents last year in Seaville. Moreover, proper supporting evidence has to be provided for the assumptions that mopeds can only be rented in Balmer island or the number of mopeds sold in sale won’t increase even if the said limits are enforced and that the effect that the limits had in Seaville will be same in Balmer Island. Only with more convincing evidence will this argument become more than a wrong comparison flaw.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 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: 507 350
No. of Characters: 2509 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.745 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.949 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.55 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 207 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.143 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.383 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.356 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.575 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.123 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 433, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...pos;t reduce significantly. Also, there isnt any proof justifying that enforcing the...
^^^^
Line 5, column 312, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...ar in Seaville. If this was true, there wouldnt be any change in number of moped accide...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, as to, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 13.6137724551 169% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2597.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 503.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16302186879 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73578520332 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68800363181 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.387673956262 0.468620217663 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 806.4 705.55239521 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 87.4736323908 57.8364921388 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.045454545 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8636363636 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.18181818182 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.319176804185 0.218282227539 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101206187755 0.0743258471296 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.088006514345 0.0701772020484 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189808341765 0.128457276422 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578727542453 0.0628817314937 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.74 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 26.5 12.3882235529 214% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.