The following appeared in a health magazine published in Corpora.
"Medical experts say that only one-quarter of Corpora's citizens meet the current standards for adequate physical fitness, even though twenty years ago, one-half of all of Corpora's citizens met the standards as then defined. But these experts are mistaken when they suggest that spending too much time using computers has caused a decline in fitness. Since overall fitness levels are highest in regions of Corpora where levels of computer ownership are also highest, it is clear that using computers has not made citizens less physically fit. Instead, as shown by this year's unusually low expenditures on fitness-related products and services, the recent decline in the economy is most likely the cause, and fitness levels will improve when the economy does."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The excerpt above that appeared in a halth magazine published in Corpora postulates that the apparent decrease in fitness levels is due to the decline in the economy and provides what appears to be valid reasons to assert that fitness levels will increase when the economy improves. While it may tempting to fall prey to the arguements presented by the author, the reader should be warned that such areguments are based on assumptions rather than facts.
To begin, the author states that only “one-quarter of Corpora’s citizens meet the current standards for aduequate physical fitness” compared to twenty years prior, when “one-half of all of Corpora's citizens met the standards as then defined”. At first, this may seem like a shocking statitstic, how could have fitness levels decreased so drastically in a mere twenty years? However, the author does not provide the current and outdated definitive standards of adequate physical fitness. It is highly possible that the definition of physical fitness in modern times is much more strict than it was twenty yeasrs ago. If that is true, then it would have been much easier for a higher number of the populatio to meet the standard criteria to be considered physicall fit compared with the current definition that could be much more strict.
Additionally, the author notes that the experts were wrong in suggesting that increased use of computers is the reason for the decline in fitness, stating that the true reason is the deline in the economy, marking a decrease in sales in fitness related products and services, yet provides no factual evidence to support this hypothesis. The passage gives no direct information about the reason in the decline in purchases of fitness products, but only assumes it must be due to the recent decline in the economy. However, it is likely that the decline in sales in fitness products is due to a lack of interest in such products and an increase in popularity of body weight workouts that don’t require any equipment.
Lastly, the author posits that the experts must be mistaken due to high levels of fitness in a certain region of Corpora where computer ownership is the highest. The author assumes that because computer ownership is the highest in this region, as is levels of fitness amoung citizens who live in this region that there is a direct reltionship between computer ownership and fitness, but what he fails to mention is the amount of computer use within this region. It is probable that computer owners are not frequent computer users. If it were true that these computer owners were also frequent comuter users, then we must ask the question how the fitness levels of the citizens of Corpora are being assessed from one region to the next. It may be true that the mesasures used to assess the amount of fit people in this region were invalid and unreliable and that they number of fit people in this high computer ownership area are actually quite low, undermining the author’s aurgument that fitness and computer use do not have a causal relationship.
The author makes an argument that fitness levels will increase when the economy improves based on fallacies presented in the passage as his supporting evidence. However, the reader can clearly see that there are gaps that leave room for alternative explanations that underpin the authors hypothesis. If Corpora wantes to increase the fitness levels of it’s population, the arguements of the author should not be considered as factual evidence.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 623, Rule ID: ASK_THE_QUESTION[1]
Message: Use simply 'ask' instead.
Suggestion: ask
...so frequent comuter users, then we must ask the question how the fitness levels of the citizens ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 282, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ernative explanations that underpin the authors hypothesis. If Corpora wantes to increa...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'so', 'then', 'while']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.258064516129 0.25644967241 101% => OK
Verbs: 0.155145929339 0.15541462614 100% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0875576036866 0.0836205057962 105% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0460829493088 0.0520304965353 89% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0215053763441 0.0272364105082 79% => OK
Prepositions: 0.135176651306 0.125424944231 108% => OK
Participles: 0.036866359447 0.0416121511921 89% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.72207180682 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.026113671275 0.026700313972 98% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.118279569892 0.113004496875 105% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0215053763441 0.0255425247493 84% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0199692780338 0.0127820249294 156% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3552.0 2731.13054187 130% => OK
No of words: 585.0 446.07635468 131% => OK
Chars per words: 6.07179487179 6.12365571057 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9180050066 4.57801047555 107% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.422222222222 0.378187486979 112% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.309401709402 0.287650121315 108% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.208547008547 0.208842608468 100% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.102564102564 0.135150697306 76% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72207180682 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 207.018472906 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.441025641026 0.469332199767 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 52.7122169707 52.1807786196 101% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 32.5 23.2022227129 140% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.3212288766 57.7814097925 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 197.333333333 141.986410481 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.5 23.2022227129 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.611111111111 0.724660767414 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 63.4401709402 51.9672348444 122% => OK
Elegance: 1.93103448276 1.8405768891 105% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.441232800197 0.441005458295 100% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.183966279956 0.135418324435 136% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.121969060774 0.0829849096947 147% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.647978869664 0.58762219726 110% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.16075696301 0.147661913831 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.200567631856 0.193483328276 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121285395129 0.0970749176394 125% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.451375376389 0.42659136922 106% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0421188902505 0.0774707102158 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.309312557103 0.312017818177 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0988975474752 0.0698173142475 142% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.33743842365 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 13.0 6.46551724138 201% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 5.36822660099 37% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.