The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a journal on environmental issues.
"Over the past year, the Crust Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over 10,000 square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in pollution and, since West Fredonia is the home of several endangered animal species, in environmental disaster. But such disasters can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC's copper unless the company abandons its mining plans."
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.
In the letter to the editor, the author concludes that an environmental disaster can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC’s copper. This argument is hinged on some unproven assumptions which are 1. The 10000 square miles land purchased by Crust Copper Company (CCC) is meant for mining. 2. That inevitably, mining of copper in West Fredonia will result to pollution and environmental disasters.
First, the author has made a hasty generalization. The fact that CCC is a copper company do not translate that the 10,000 square miles it has acquired in the tropical nation of West Fredonia will be used for mining copper. It could be use for the production of refined copper materials used for other purposes. It may serve as its manufacturing hub because West Fredonia has cheap labor force that invariably will reduce cost of manpower. To bolster this argument the author ought to have provided empirical data that clearly suggests that the recent purchased lands will be used for mining.
In addition, the author failed to show statistical data that outline the existence of a sizeable amount of copper in the tropical nation. If there in fact exist no such data, it means that the assumption that the land will be used for mining is particularly unwarranted and baseless. Mining occurs in places were there is large deposit of such minerals and failure to substantiate the above makes the argument unfounded.
Even, if there exist a sizeable amount of copper deposit and the acquired land is to be used for mining. This does not translate to having an inevitable environmental disaster. Some of the questions that the author failed to answer are: Does West Fredonia have a very sound policy on mining which companies like CCC has to follow. If this is the case, then it means that CCC practice in mining of the copper must follow industry standards outlined by the tropical nation which will prevent possible environment disaster. The author assumed that no such policy exists without evidence to substantiate such claim.
Furthermore, the mere fact that West Fredonia is home to endangered species does not translate to a claim that mining of coppers will lead to environmental disasters. What are the practices in the country before now that has contributed to the extinction of those species? Is mining of copper the reason or sole reason why these species are going into extinction or there are other factors like indiscriminate hunting and other practice. If there exist other factors then it is particularly unwarranted to rely on the aforementioned assumptions.
Though, I concede that if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC’s copper, then it will greatly impact sales and revenues of the company. This leaves out the possibility that if CCC’s products are particularly cheap compared to their competitors then consumers may still buy their products even if their mining practices impacts the environment. Also, companies usually weigh the cost of their practices and evaluate how it affects their profitability so if the cost of mining copper in West Fredonia is less than the fall out resulting from such practice then I am afraid that the company will not abandon its mining plans.
In sum, the author most substantiate with evidence that there exists a sizeable amount of copper in the tropical nation of West Fredonia, that CCC’s mining policy is detrimental to the environment and would lead to inevitably environmental disaster, and that mining of copper is solely related to the extinction of species in West Fredonia and that consumers will refuse to purchase products made with CCC’s copper. Failure to substantiate these claims with evidence renders the assumptions unwarranted and the argument invalid.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 27 15
No. of Words: 624 350
No. of Characters: 3128 1500
No. of Different Words: 242 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.998 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.013 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.71 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 236 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 155 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 121 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.111 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.764 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.444 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.296 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.296 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.052 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 177, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...g an inevitable environmental disaster. Some of the questions that the author failed to ans...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 438, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...iscriminate hunting and other practice. If there exist other factors then it is pa...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, may, so, still, then, as to, in addition, in fact, i am afraid
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 28.0 13.6137724551 206% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 50.0 28.8173652695 174% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3194.0 2260.96107784 141% => OK
No of words: 624.0 441.139720559 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11858974359 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.99799879888 4.56307096286 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76894140226 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.392628205128 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 999.0 705.55239521 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.6091649973 57.8364921388 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.846153846 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.73076923077 5.70786347227 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.375216680882 0.218282227539 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111433638559 0.0743258471296 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102580438469 0.0701772020484 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210750862307 0.128457276422 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.087842622477 0.0628817314937 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.